Create digital product

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

Beyond the annotations declaring a non-read-only, non-destructive operation, the description adds valuable behavioral context: the product is immediately published and has exactly one variant. It also clarifies that the download link is external and optional, which is not obvious from the schema alone.

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 tightly worded sentence front-loads the core action and the key state constraints. There is no filler, no restating of the schema, and no unnecessary detail.

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 create tool with flat parameters, no enums, and no output schema, the description includes the key contextual facts: the product is published and single-variant. It does not describe the response or returned product ID, which would be useful without an output schema, but this is not required to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema already documents 100% of the parameters with clear descriptions, so the baseline applies. The description adds little parameter detail beyond confirming the optional nature of download_url, which is already evident from 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?

States exactly what the tool does: creates a digital product that is published, single-variant, and optionally has an external download link. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ecommerce_createPhysicalProductV1 and variant-management tools without needing to inspect 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?

The description implies the use case: digital, single-variant product creation. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when to prefer the physical-product, product-update, or multi-variant creation siblings, so the agent must infer routing from the wording.

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