Sync Work Order Contracts

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) that is not destructive nor idempotent. The description adds that it performs batch create/update and returns the modified object, but it does not elaborate on potential side effects, permission requirements, or rate limits. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise with three sentences, front-loading the main purpose. It includes a helpful link, required parameters, and API route info. There is slight redundancy in mentioning 'creates or updates' and later 'updates', but overall efficient.

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 simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema, no nested objects), the description covers the purpose, return value, required parameters, and provides a documentation link. It does not explain the updates format or error handling, but is adequate for a straightforward sync operation.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline 3 applies. The description repeats the required parameter names but does not add meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain the structure of the 'updates' array or any constraints on the parameters.

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 creates or updates a batch of Work Order Contracts, specifying the resource (Commitments) and action (sync). It includes the HTTP method and endpoint path. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling sync tools or individual create/update endpoints, which are present in the sibling list.

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 usage for batch updates and references external documentation. It lists required parameters but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_work_order_contract or update_work_order_contract, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites.

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