Create a product feed for a catalog by providing catalog ID, feed name, schedule, and file URL.
Create a new product feed for a catalog.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Feed name | |
| file_url | No | URL of the feed file | |
| schedule | No | JSON string for feed schedule configuration | |
| catalog_id | Yes | Product catalog ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the creation action and does not disclose side effects, required permissions, validation behavior, or return value. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.
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?
A single concise sentence that gets straight to the point with no filler. Front-loaded with the action and resource.
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?
The description is too sparse for a create operation with no output schema or annotations. It does not explain what constitutes a feed, how file_url and schedule relate, or what the response looks like. There is also no mention of prerequisites like an existing catalog.
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?
The schema already describes all four parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the parameter names, so it relies entirely on the schema's minimal descriptions.
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 clearly states it creates a new product feed for a catalog, using a specific verb and resource. It is differentiated from related feed operations like upload_feed or list_feeds by the explicit 'create' action.
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?
No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as upload_feed or update_catalog. The context implies creation of a new feed, but there are no explicit exclusions or conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.