update_organization

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description confirms 'update.' No additional behavioral details (e.g., permissions, side effects) are provided beyond the annotation, but the prerequisite note adds some context.

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 three concise sentences: first for purpose, second for usage guidance, third for a parameter explanation. No redundancy or wasted words.

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 an output schema exists and annotations cover destructiveness, the description adds the prerequisite and a parameter note. It is mostly complete, though it could list all updatable fields explicitly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description only explains the 'custom_fields' parameter with an example JSON format. The 'id' and 'name' parameters are left to inference, which is acceptable given their simplicity. Partial but helpful.

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 'Update an existing organization,' using a specific verb (update) and resource (organization), and distinguishes from sibling tools like update_contact and update_deal.

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 advises to 'Use get_organization first to check current data,' providing a clear prerequisite and context for proper use, though it does not explicitly list when not to use or alternative tools.

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