Update A Time And Material Equipment Log

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

Annotations already indicate not read-only and not destructive. Beyond annotations, the description adds that it performs a partial update and returns the modified object. This adds value but does not cover auth requirements, rate limits, or potential side effects.

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 four sentences, front-loads the purpose, and contains no redundant information. Every sentence earns its place, making it highly 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 missing output schema, the description states 'returns the modified object on success', which is sufficient. However, it does not mention error conditions or idempotency. With 7 parameters, the description could offer more guidance on usage scenarios.

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 the schema already documents each parameter. The description reiterates the required parameters and endpoint path but adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 clearly states the verb 'update' and the resource 'Time And Material Equipment Log'. It specifies that only supplied fields are changed, distinguishing it from a full replacement. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'bulk_update_time_and_material_equipment_logs'.

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 provides context: 'Use this to update an existing Field Productivity records (only the supplied fields are changed)' and lists required parameters. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives (e.g., the bulk update sibling).

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