Update Product

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses key behavioral traits: it updates only attributes (not price/stock), existing attributes cannot be deleted, the update is asynchronous (returns task_id), and identification can be via product_id or offer_id. No contradictions with annotations since none are provided.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by important caveats and async behavior. It is concise, with only necessary details. Could be slightly more streamlined, but overall efficient.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return value (task_id) and async nature. It covers identification methods and constraints. However, it does not address error cases or behavior when both product_id and offer_id are provided or omitted (no required params). Still, it provides sufficient context for typical use.

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%, so parameters are well-documented. The description adds meaning by explaining that 'attributes' are for product characteristics, that product identification options are flexible, and that the return is a task_id for async processing. This adds context beyond the 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 clearly states the tool updates product attributes/characteristics, using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes from siblings by noting that price and stock updates are handled by separate tools (update_prices, update_stocks).

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 explicitly advises against using this tool for price/stock updates, directing to alternatives. It also mentions that existing attributes cannot be deleted, only added or changed. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over other product-related siblings like get_product or create_product.

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