Update_product_variant_detail

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It only says 'update' without clarifying if it's a partial or full update, permissions needed, or whether it affects products with/without variants consistently. No mention of side effects or idempotency.

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 sentence, but it contains ambiguous phrasing ('both with and without variant product') that reduces clarity. It could be more concise and precise, but it's not overly long.

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 8 parameters, sibling tools, and an output schema (though not shown), the description lacks context about the update behavior, response structure, and how it handles different product types. Incomplete for a mutation tool of this 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 100% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what's in the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate. It doesn't explain relationships or constraints beyond schema.

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 states it updates variant detail, but it's vague: 'specific variant detail' and 'both with and without variant product' is unclear. It doesn't specify which fields can be updated, relying on schema. Compared to sibling tools like Update_product_detail, it distinguishes by targeting variants, but purpose is not sharply defined.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like Update_product_detail, Create_product_variants, or Delete_product_variant. No context on prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios.

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