update_account

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Update', but does not explain if this is a partial or full replacement, whether it is destructive, idempotent, or what happens when the account does not exist. No mention of authentication, rate limits, or side effects.

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 a single sentence, which is concise and front-loaded, but it omits critical information. It is not overly verbose, but it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 is a mutation with a nested patch parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, error behavior, or what fields are updatable, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 only 50% (only 'company' described). The description adds no details about 'account_id' (e.g., format, source) or 'patch' (e.g., allowed fields, structure). The agent is left to infer the patch object's expected properties without guidance.

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 that the tool updates an existing chart-of-accounts entry in Quickbooks, using a specific verb and resource. Among siblings, it is the only 'update_account' tool, so it is easily distinguishable from create, get, search, and delete tools.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_account' or other update tools. It does not mention prerequisites, such as needing an existing account ID, or when a patch is appropriate over full update.

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