google_deactivate_purchase_option

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure. It states the state change and its effect, but it omits whether the deactivation is reversible, how existing purchases are affected, and what permissions or edit/commit workflow is required.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It puts the action and resource first, then the effect.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It should mention prerequisites, reversibility, side effects on existing purchases, and whether a commit/edit step is needed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%: productId, packageName, and purchaseOptionId are each documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about parameter formats or constraints beyond what the schema already provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Deactivate a one-time product purchase option.' It clearly states the effect: the option 'stops being available for purchase.' However, it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling tool google_activate_purchase_option or with delete/update alternatives.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'so it stops being available for purchase' implies when to use the tool, but the description gives no explicit guidance on when not to use it or which alternative to choose, such as google_activate_purchase_option or google_delete_one_time_product.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.