create_custom_product_page

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — it does not explain what is created, what the destructive side effect is, whether duplicates are possible (non-idempotent), or any auth requirements.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though it is arguably under-specified rather than deliberately concise.

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 two-parameter create tool with full schema coverage and clear annotations, the essentials are present. However, with no output schema, the description says nothing about what is returned (e.g., the new page ID) or what happens on failure, leaving a gap for an agent that needs the created resource's identifier.

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?

Both parameters (appId, name) are fully documented in the schema at 100% coverage, so the schema carries parameter meaning. The description only echoes 'for an app' and adds no format or constraint detail beyond it — 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 (create) plus resource (custom product page) scoped to an app. The verb and the 'custom product page' resource distinguish it from siblings like update_custom_product_page and list_custom_product_pages without needing the schema.

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?

No guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., create_experiment or update_custom_product_page), no prerequisites, and no note on whether the app needs an existing version or locale setup. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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