Upsert product

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full disclosure burden. It reveals the upsert behavior and key field but omits effects like what happens to unspecified fields, required permissions, reversibility, or return values. This is minimal 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?

The description is a single sentence that front-loads the core operation and key field. No filler or redundant information.

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?

Given the complexity of an upsert with 9 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to map fields correctly, explain required fields, or describe behavior on existing vs new records, leaving significant gaps for correct tool invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies manage_number as the upsert key and references title/price/genre, but the schema has 9 parameters and the description leaves tagline, item_type, variant_id, description, item_number, and standard_price undefined. It also uses 'price' where the schema has 'standard_price', adding potential confusion.

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 states the operation clearly: '新規登録または更新（管理番号でupsert）' (create or update by management number). This distinguishes it from product read/delete/patch siblings, though it does not explicitly compare with rms_patch_product.

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?

Usage is implied: use when you need to register or update a product identified by manage_number. No explicit guidance on when to prefer this over rms_patch_product, rms_update_price, or other alternatives is provided.

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