update_products

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states an update occurs but does not clarify whether it is a merge or replacement, what happens if the row does not exist, or any side effects. This leaves significant ambiguity for a mutation tool.

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 that is direct and front-loaded, with no redundant or vague content. It earns its place with high information density.

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 simple two-parameter CRUD tool, the description provides the essential purpose and a hint about the data parameter. However, key behaviors like partial vs. full update and handling of missing rows are not addressed, leaving gaps in completeness. The presence of an output schema mitigates some concern about return values.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'data' as a JSON string of fields to update, adding meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not specify the JSON structure or clarify how 'row_id' is used beyond the phrase 'by id', so compensation is partial.

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 the action ('Update a row in products by id'), specifying both the resource and the method of identification. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_products, create_products, and delete_products.

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 implies use for updating existing product rows but does not explicitly discuss when to choose this tool over alternatives (e.g., create_products for new rows, delete_products for removal). No explicit exclusion or comparison with siblings is provided.

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