Create product

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses that this creates a live production product hidden from clients unless clients_can_order is true. It also explains default behaviors (single product, single-option order type, monthly billing), adding significant behavioral context.

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?

Three sentences with no filler: the main action, defaults, extra parameter guidance, and production warning. Each sentence earns its place and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 there is no output schema, the description doesn't specify return values, but it does cover core behavior, defaults, and production implications. It's reasonably complete for an agent to invoke the tool, though it omits error scenarios or prerequisites beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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?

With 75% schema coverage, the description goes further by clarifying that 'extra' can pass through any Upmind product fields, and it explains the practical effect of clients_can_order. It also contextualizes billing defaults, adding value beyond the schema's individual parameter 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 opens with 'Create a new product in a category,' a specific verb-object-resource pairing. It clearly distinguishes from sibling operations like update_product and duplicate_product by stating a creation 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?

The description provides clear context that this tool is for initial product creation, and the mention of 'sensible defaults' and 'PRODUCTION' helps set expectations. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use the tool, so it doesn't fully reach the 'explicit when/when-not' bar.

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