set_product_published

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, so the description carries most of the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that this bypasses a full update, but for a mutation it never warns that setting false hides/unpublishes live products, nor whether the change is reversible or what permissions it needs.

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 tight sentence with the key differentiator (no full update) front-loaded after the verb phrase. Nothing is wasted.

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 simple 2-parameter boolean toggle with a complete schema and no output schema, the description covers what the tool does and why it exists. It is slightly thin on mutation side effects and bulk-failure behavior, but nothing essential to invoking it is missing.

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 100% and both parameters are documented there (product_ids, is_published with true=publish/false=hide). The description adds no parameter-level syntax or semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (publish/unpublish) on a specific resource (products), with scope "one or more" for bulk. The parenthetical "without a full update" differentiates it from update_product, so an agent can route between the two without inspecting schemas.

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 "quickly (without a full update)" cue tells the agent to prefer this over a full product update when only the published flag needs changing. It does not explicitly name update_product or state exclusions, but the usage context is clearly implied.

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