Sync Purchase Order Contracts

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

Beyond annotations (readOnly=false, etc.), it reveals partial-update behavior ('omitted fields keep their current values'), error payload structure, and common auth/permission/id error statuses (401, 403, 404). This is valuable context for an agent.

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?

Every sentence carries operational value: purpose, link to docs, update semantics, return value, error behavior, required params, and API reference. It is front-loaded with the purpose and remains under control despite the density.

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?

For a batched sync endpoint with no output schema, the description covers purpose, input requirements, partial update semantics, success return, and error scenarios. The 'Using Sync Actions' link points to additional details. It is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke 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?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage), but the description adds crucial semantics: the 'updates' array is expected to contain only fields to change, and id references must exist (per 404 error). This goes beyond the schema's minimal field descriptions.

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 opens with 'creates or updates a batch of Purchase Order Contracts,' providing a specific verb, resource, and batch scope. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like create/update/list/delete, and the endpoint path further clarifies the sync action.

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?

It states this endpoint is for batch create/update and links to 'Using Sync Actions.' It also gives practical guidance on sending only changed fields. However, it doesn't explicitly say 'use this instead of individual create/update when working with multiple contracts,' so there's no explicit exclusion, though context implies it.

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