update_product

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Update a product' without disclosing whether this is a partial update (only provided fields) or a full replacement, what happens to unmentioned fields, or what occurs if the product is not found. It also omits any side effects, permissions, or idempotency information.

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, concise sentence that conveys the essential purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loads the core action.

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 tool with 10 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is critically incomplete. It does not mention return values, error handling, update semantics (partial vs full), or any other operational detail needed for safe usage. The agent would have to rely on the schema alone, which is insufficient given the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is low (30%) with descriptions only on id, name, and identifier. The description adds meaning to the required identifier parameter ('current ID or exact name') but provides no clarification for the other seven parameters (price, stock, status, etc.), which lack schema descriptions. It does not compensate for the missing 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 clearly states the action ('Update a product') and specifies the selection mechanism ('by its current ID or exact name'), which also differentiates it from sibling tools like add_product (create) and delete_product (delete). It is a specific verb+resource description.

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 implies usage (when you need to modify an existing product) by mentioning 'current ID or exact name,' but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. There is no guidance about using search first or the need for an existing product.

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