Create product

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action and a parameter requirement; it does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, idempotency, error behavior, or the return value. For a mutation tool, this is a notable 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?

The description is two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and includes only essential information (requirement and schema reference). No filler or redundancy.

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 complex tool with a nested product object and no output schema, the description effectively directs to get_operation_schema for the full request shape, which is a practical pattern. However, it omits details about the response or failure modes, so it is not fully complete but sufficient for invocation.

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%, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds value by specifying that category_ids is an array of category UUIDs and requires at least one, which is not fully detailed in the schema. It also points to get_operation_schema for complete request shape, enhancing parameter understanding.

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 'Create a new product' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from siblings like list_products, get_product, and update_product. It is not a tautology and directly conveys the tool's function.

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 requires category_ids with the constraint 'at least one', and instructs the agent to call get_operation_schema("CreateProduct") for the exact request shape. This gives clear usage context, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use the tool or alternatives.

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