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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds only that the product must exist and that at least one field must be updated; it does not clarify partial-update semantics, what happens to omitted fields, permission requirements, or what makes the operation destructive.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the key precondition. There is no redundant wording or filler.

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 definition is minimally adequate for a destructive mutation: the schema fully documents all seven parameters and annotations cover the safety profile, while no output schema exists. The main missing piece is partial-update behavior, which matters for an update tool but is not explained.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented in the input schema. The description only restates that the ID is required and at least one field must be supplied, adding no field-specific meaning 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 states a specific verb and resource: update an existing product/service. It is clearly a mutation of an existing entity, distinguishing it by name from create_product, delete_product, and fetch_product, though it does not explicitly name those siblings.

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?

It provides a useful precondition: the product ID is required and at least one update field must be supplied. However, it gives no guidance on when to use this versus create_product or fetch_product, nor any prerequisite steps such as fetching the product first.

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