Update a listing

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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, non-destructive, closed-world mutation, and the description adds one genuinely useful trait beyond them: the post text is re-drafted as a side effect. However, it says nothing about partial-update semantics (what happens to fields left out), reversibility, or any side effects of status transitions like withdrawn/sold.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the mutation scope comes first and the side effect second. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity is closer to under-specification than to tight editing.

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 7-parameter mutation tool with a nested rules object, no output schema and no schema descriptions, the definition is too thin: it leaves the ceiling parameter unexplained, the rules sub-fields undefined, and partial-update behavior unstated. An agent could invoke it but could easily get semantics wrong.

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 7 parameters, including a nested rules object with 8 sub-properties, so the description carries the full burden. It only echoes a few English names (price, floor, rules, status, photos), omits 'ceiling' entirely, and explains none of the nested rule fields or their constraints.

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 (Change) plus the concrete resources it touches (price, floor, rules, status, photos) and adds the notable side effect that the post text is re-drafted. It does not name or contrast with siblings like create_listing or post_listing, so an agent must infer the boundary itself.

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?

There is no when/when-not guidance and no mention of the alternative tools (create_listing, post_listing, list_listings) or prerequisites such as needing an existing listing id. Usage is only implied by the tool name.

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