Cm360.Placement.Update

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden; it does usefully reveal that this mutation is guarded by a preview step and a confirm token, and that the update is partial. It omits what happens if confirm is absent, whether the preview returns the diff, permission requirements, and reversibility.

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 dense sentence with the action, the identifier, the update semantics, and the guard mechanism front-loaded. Nothing is padded, though the parenthetical is compressed to the point of ambiguity.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and a nested free-form fields object, the description leaves too much open: allowed field keys, the preview/confirm protocol, and profile_id semantics. An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but the input-side gaps remain significant.

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% across 4 parameters. The description covers placement_id and gestures at 'fields' and the confirm token, but says nothing about profile_id and gives no guidance on what keys the free-form 'fields' object (additionalProperties: true) accepts — the single most important unknown for a partial update.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Update a placement by id') plus the update mode ('partial field set'), which is enough to distinguish it from cm360.placements.list. It stops short of naming or contrasting any sibling explicitly.

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 parenthetical '(guarded: preview + confirm token)' implies a two-phase workflow, but the description never says how to obtain the preview or token, nor when to call without confirm. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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