Update a WooCommerce product brand by ID, changing its name, slug, or description to keep product brand data accurate in your store.
Update a WooCommerce product brand
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Brand ID | |
| name | No | ||
| slug | No | ||
| description | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure. 'Update' implies mutation, but the description omits permissions, reversibility, side effects, and what happens to unspecified fields, which is a significant gap for a write operation.
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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, so it is structurally efficient. However, it is arguably too terse for a 4-parameter mutation tool, which slightly reduces its appropriateness.
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?
For a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, 4 parameters, and only 25% schema coverage, the description is far too thin. It lacks field-level guidance, permissions, and behavioral context that an agent needs to call it correctly.
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 only 25% (only 'id' is described as 'Brand ID'), and the description adds no parameter details. It does not clarify the roles of name, slug, or description, so it fails 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?
States a specific verb (Update) and resource (WooCommerce product brand), which is clear. However, it does not distinguish this from sibling update tools like wc_update_product_category or wc_update_product_tag, so it falls short of the top score.
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?
Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as wc_add_product_brand or wc_update_product. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or contextual cues, leaving the agent to infer usage entirely.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.