xero_update_purchase_order

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only notes routing through '/api/tools/invoke' and scope under JWT/tenant/company. It does not describe the update's effect (e.g., which fields are immutable), error handling, or whether changes are reversible. This is minimal transparency.

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 brief (3 sentences) but contains redundant repetition of the tool name and parameter name. It front-loads identically named details, but the lack of substantive content makes it poorly structured for decision-making.

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 complexity of updating a purchase order in Xero, the description is severely incomplete. It omits details on required fields, output format (despite having an output schema), and integration context. The minimal content is insufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The description says 'arguments: JSON string of arguments for the connector operation,' which adds no meaning beyond the schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining the expected JSON structure or required fields (e.g., PurchaseOrderID, LineItems). It does not, leaving the agent unable to form valid arguments.

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 states it is an 'update_purchase_order' operation, which implies it updates purchase orders. However, it merely restates the tool name without specifying what fields can be updated or how it differs from similar tools like xero_create_purchase_order. The purpose is clear but lacks specificity and sibling differentiation.

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 instead of other Xero tools (e.g., xero_create_purchase_order, xero_get_purchase_order). The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or alternatives, leaving the agent without decision support.

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