Sync Company Vendors

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructiveness. The description adds that only supplied fields are changed and returns the modified object, providing useful behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 verbose with markdown headings, multiple links, and redundant text (e.g., repeating 'Updates the specified Directory records'). It could be condensed to a single sentence without losing meaning.

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?

The description explains batch behavior and partial updates, but lacks details on the updates array structure, return format, error handling, or rate limits. Given no output schema and moderate complexity, it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description introduces country_code and state_code parameters that are not in the schema, potentially misleading. It also repeats required parameters already obvious from the schema, adding little value and causing confusion.

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 tool's purpose: 'Creates or updates a batch of Company Vendors.' This specific verb+resource construction with 'batch' differentiates it from sibling tools like create_company_vendor (single) and update_company_vendor (single).

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 batch usage via the term 'sync' and mentions 'batch,' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_company_vendor or update_company_vendor. There is no direct comparison or exclusion criteria.

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