Update Offer Price

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

The description discloses that changes are applied asynchronously and returns a process status, adding value beyond annotations. Annotations already indicate it's not read-only or destructive, but the description adds the async 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?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second gives key requirement and mentions async/return. No wasted words, front-loaded with essential info.

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 the moderate complexity (2 required params, nested object) and no output schema, the description covers the async nature and return type. It could mention prerequisites like having an existing offer, but is mostly complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description adds minimal value beyond reiterating the requirement for quantity 1, which is already enforced by the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Update the pricing for an existing offer', which clearly identifies the verb and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'update_offer', but the specificity to pricing is clear.

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 provides a requirement ('Provide bundle prices with at least one entry for quantity 1') but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The async behavior is noted but no exclusions or alternatives are given.

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