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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds specific behavioral facts beyond annotations: it requires the current SyncToken (optimistic concurrency) and returns the saved record with its new SyncToken, which helps an agent understand the workflow and response.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by the prerequisite and return behavior. No filler or repetition; every clause earns its place.

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?

Given no output schema, the description helpfully states the return value (saved record with new SyncToken), and the schema covers sparse update semantics. Annotations cover destructiveness. The description could mention that the company parameter exists, but the schema handles that adequately.

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 the entity and company parameters are already fully documented. The description reinforces the Id/SyncToken requirement but adds no syntax, format, or constraint details beyond what the schema provides.

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 (Update) and resource (inventory adjustment) in QuickBooks Online, clearly distinguishing it from create/delete/get siblings for the same entity. An agent can identify the exact operation without opening 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?

Provides clear context and prerequisites: requires Id and the current SyncToken, with the note to fetch the InventoryAdjustment first. It does not explicitly say when to use this versus create_inventory_adjustment for new records, but the word 'existing' implies the distinction and no misleading guidance is given.

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