update_custom_product_page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It omits any mention of permissions, side effects, idempotency, error cases, or return values. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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?

One concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and target, and is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The tool is simple, and the schema covers all parameter meanings. However, with no output schema or annotations, the description does not mention what the response looks like or any behavioral caveats. This is adequate but not complete.

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%: each parameter has a description (pageId, name, visible). The tool description adds minimal value beyond the schema, but it does reiterate the relevant fields ('name or visibility'). This meets the baseline for high 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 specifies the action ('Update') and the resource ('custom product page'), and identifies the specific updatable fields ('name or visibility'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_custom_product_page and get_custom_product_page.

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 offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_custom_product_page or get_custom_product_page. It simply restates the action, which duplicates purpose clarity. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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