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

The annotations provide no behavioral information (all hints false). The description discloses that it's an update (PUT) but lacks details on side effects, idempotency, error handling, or permissions. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's runtime behavior.

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 concise, consisting of two short sentences. It presents the core functionality and bulk support without extraneous information, making it easy to parse.

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 description covers the essential operational aspects (endpoint, parameters, bulk support) but does not address error conditions, data format expectations, or authentication requirements. Given no output schema, return value details are not mandated, but additional context would improve completeness.

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 description clarifies the purpose of `id` (product identifier) and `data` (fields to alter), and mentions `ids` for bulk operations. However, `account` is not explained, and the schema provides no descriptions. Coverage is approximately 75%, so the description adds some value but is incomplete.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Altera um produto' (alters a product) with the HTTP method PUT and endpoint. It distinguishes from sibling tools like mercos_update_cliente and mercos_update_pedido by specifying the resource type.

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 indicates usage by specifying the HTTP method, endpoint, and required parameters (`id` + `data`). It also mentions bulk support via `ids`, which provides practical usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over others or exclude scenarios.

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