update_work_order

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

No annotations are provided, so the description rightly carries the burden. It discloses that this is a live write operation and reveals a meaningful side effect: setting status to completed/cancelled auto-stamps date_closed to today unless explicitly provided. It doesn't cover reversibility or permissions, but the critical behavior is surfaced.

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 dense, purposeful sentences: the first states purpose and enumerates editable fields; the second discloses a subtle auto-behavior. Zero filler, info-rich and scannable.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description covers the key agent-relevant points: side effects, ID source, editable fields. It doesn't mention permissions or whether partial updates preserve untouched fields, but it is strong enough to support correct invocation.

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 schema itself already documents the parameters well-hat. The description adds a valuable warning about work_order_id being the Rentvine system ID, not the human-facing number, but otherwise mostly restates what the schema conveys.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource — 'Update a maintenance work order in Rentvine (live data, write)' — and clearly enumerates the mutable fields. It distinguishes itself from list_work_orders by explicitly positioning itself as the mutate counterpart.

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 says exactly when to use the tool ('use this to change status, priority, scheduling dates...') and references list_work_orders as the source for the correct work_order_id. It doesn't state exclusions for when not to use it, but the guidance is concrete and actionable.

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