update_partner

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

The description adds negligible behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide. While annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, the description does not clarify that the tool performs an update (partial or full) or potential side effects like overwriting fields.

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 short sentence in Hungarian, which is concise but lacks substance. It does not provide essential information such as the idempotent nature or parameter details. More detail is needed to be helpful.

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 tool's complexity (11 parameters, nested address object) and the absence of an output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain return values, error conditions, or that only provided fields are updated, leaving the agent underinformed.

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?

All 11 parameters are fully described in the input schema with intuitive names and descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Partner adatainak módosítása' (Modification of partner data) is essentially a tautology of the tool name 'update_partner'. It does not specify the scope or distinguish from sibling tools like 'create_partner' or 'delete_partner'.

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 versus alternatives such as 'create_partner' (for adding a new partner) or 'delete_partner'. Prerequisites like the existence of the partner are not mentioned.

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