brc_update_sales_credit_note

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

With no annotations, the description shoulders the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the two-step confirmation process, returning a preview. However, it doesn't mention potential need for specific permissions or the result after successful update.

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 concise sentences: first states purpose, second details the critical workflow. No redundancy, perfectly front-loaded.

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 tool's complexity (update with confirmation) and lack of output schema, the description covers the essential workflow but omits post-confirmation behavior and error handling. It is complete enough for an AI agent to use correctly in most scenarios.

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 60% (3 of 5 params have descriptions). The description adds value by explaining the confirmWrite workflow and noting 'structured safe text/reference fields' for note and reference, but doesn't provide additional constraints or format beyond what is in the schema.

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 it updates a BRC sales credit note, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like brc_create_sales_credit_note and brc_delete_sales_credit_note.

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 explicit workflow guidance: first call without confirmWrite for preflight, then retry with confirmWrite after user confirmation. It clarifies when not to set confirmWrite, which is highly helpful for correct invocation.

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