update_product_price

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the write nature with [WRITE], the exact API endpoint, return structure, and side effects including immediate price display and lack of impact on existing orders. This is comprehensive 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 well-organized into concise sections, front-loading the core purpose. Every sentence provides useful information without padding, and the structure (purpose, API, return, side effects) makes it easy to scan.

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?

The tool is simple with two required parameters and no output schema, and the description covers usage, alternatives, API, return structure, and side effects. It is fully sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly without ambiguity.

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?

The input schema already describes both parameters (product_id as internal ID, price as new TWD amount) with 100% coverage. The description does not add significant additional parameter syntax or format details beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states it updates the selling price for products without variants, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling update_variation_price by explicitly noting the variant-product constraint. Applicable scenarios like price adjustments and promo-end restorations add clarity.

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?

It explicitly says to use this tool for setting prices of non-variant products and provides context (price adjustments, restoring original price). It directly instructs to use update_variation_price for variant products, making the alternative and when-not-to-use explicit.

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