update_order

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States 'Update fields' implying partial updates but fails to disclose side effects, idempotency, validation rules (e.g., customerId existence checks), or what occurs to unmodified fields.

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?

Extremely concise at 6 words with action-front-loaded structure. No wasted words, though brevity is excessive given the mutation complexity and lack of annotations.

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?

Mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema requires richer behavioral context. Description fails to address return values, error conditions, or state transition rules (e.g., can status move from 'closed' to 'open'?).

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 has 100% description coverage, setting baseline at 3. Description adds minimal value beyond schema by only generically referencing 'fields' without explaining parameter relationships or business logic (e.g., changing customerId implications).

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?

Clear verb ('Update') and resource ('existing work order'), with 'existing' distinguishing from create_order. However, lacks explicit differentiation guidance from siblings like update_customer or update_appointment beyond the resource name.

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?

No when/when-not guidance provided. Does not mention prerequisites (e.g., order must exist), partial vs full update semantics, or when to use get_order vs update_order.

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