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

Annotations already flag this as a destructive, non-read-only mutation, so the description should explain what is destroyed or overwritten. It adds one useful behavioral note ('family is consolidated first') but omits whether omitted fields are cleared, whether changes are reversible, and what permissions are required.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with the mutation target and fields front-loaded and no filler. It is compact, though brevity comes at the cost of the missing details noted above.

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 three-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema and no schema descriptions, the description is thin: it gives purpose and one consolidation note but no semantics for the required identifier or the price field. Adequate to attempt a call, not sufficient to call it confidently.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning and does not: it never explains the required 'id' parameter, nor units, ranges, or validation for quantity and purchasePriceEur. Mentioning 'purchase total' only loosely maps to purchasePriceEur.

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 names a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('sealed product') and lists the two mutable fields, quantity and purchase total. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings such as update_copy or add_sealed, though it does not explicitly say so.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus add_sealed, remove_sealed, or keep_one_of_family, and no prerequisites or preconditions are stated. The only contextual hint is the parenthetical about family consolidation, which implies behavior but not selection criteria.

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