Update one product across multiple channels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false. The description adds the crucial 'Preview or update' dichotomy and 'in parallel' execution behavior. It does not contradict annotations, so a score of 4 is warranted for adding behavioral context beyond the structured hints.

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, direct sentence with no filler. It front-loads the verb and scope.

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?

This is a complex multi-step operation (preview/update across channels) with output schema, but the description lacks essential context such as the need for idempotency keys, approval tokens, expectations on channel mapping, or the safe preview-first workflow. It is too terse to fully orient an agent.

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%. The single-sentence description gives no parameter guidance, while the schema has a complex command object with many fields including idempotency_key, approval_token, channels, and payloads. The description adds no semantics for these parameters, failing to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 phrase 'Preview or update' and names the resource 'a mapped product' and scope 'across selected channels in parallel'. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like product_get (retrieval) and product_delete (removal).

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 explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. The description implies usage for updating mapped products but does not mention when to prefer this over product_publish or product_stop, nor any exclusions.

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