PayPing: create product

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true and non-idempotent, so the safety burden is partially carried. The description adds value beyond that by stating 'Creates real data' and demanding user confirmation of title and price before the call, which is actionable behavioral guidance not present in annotations.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and return value, then the downstream tool reference and the safety caution. No filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation isn't required, yet the description still names the returned `code` to enable chaining. Combined with the confirmation guidance, it is nearly complete; it stops short of noting duplicate/non-idempotent behavior for repeated calls.

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 67%, and the description only alludes to 'title and price', mapping loosely to the title and amount_toman fields. It adds no detail for the remaining parameters (has_tax, quantity, amount_set_by_payer, description), leaving the schema to do most of the work.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a product') and clarifies the return value ('return its `code`'), which distinguishes it from read-side siblings like payping_get_product and payping_list_products. An agent knows immediately this is the write entry point for the product lifecycle.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to the next step ('Then payping_create_payment_link makes a public payment page for it') and prescribes a confirmation workflow before invocation. It gives clear positive context but no explicit when-not-to-use guidance (e.g. duplicate handling).

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