upgrade_service

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

No annotations provided, so description covers all behavioral transparency. It discloses that the tool spends real money, bills the difference, and requires specific scope. Also explains that confirm=false makes no API call, adding critical safety 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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, behavioral warning with scope, and usage guidance. No wasted words; front-loaded information. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema, but description doesn't specify return format. However, it adequately covers inputs, prerequisites, and behavioral traits. Could mention response (e.g., order details) but is sufficient for an upgrade action.

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 already covers all 4 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description adds value by explaining confirm requires user approval, service_id comes from list_services, and newProductId from list_upgrade_options, enriching parameter meaning.

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?

Description clearly states the tool creates an upgrade order moving a service to a new product/plan, with specific verb and resource. It also links to sibling tool list_upgrade_options for preview, differentiating it from other service-related 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?

Explicitly instructs to pass confirm:true only after user approval and preview with list_upgrade_options, and mentions required scope services:write. Also warns about spending money, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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