Update Bid Board Project Custom Field

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

Description states it updates and returns modified object, and notes 'only the supplied fields are changed'. Annotations already indicate mutating (readOnlyHint false) and non-destructive. No additional details on permissions, rate limits, or error cases. Adequate but minimal extra context.

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?

Description is concise (~3 sentences), front-loaded with purpose. Includes additional useful info (partial update, required params, API endpoint) without verbosity. Efficiently conveys necessary details.

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 simple update tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers operation, partial update, required params, and endpoint. It doesn't explain return format in detail but states 'returns the modified object'. Missing error semantics but adequate for the complexity.

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 is 3. Description adds meaning by stating required parameters and hinting that 'value' is optional via 'only the supplied fields are changed'. This provides partial update context beyond schema but not extensive.

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 action ('Update') and the resource ('Bid Board project custom field'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'update_bid_board_project' by specifying 'custom field'. However, it uses 'Bid Board records' which may cause slight confusion but overall purpose is clear.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'only the supplied fields are changed' (partial update) but does not compare with update_bid_board_project or other siblings. No when-not-to-use or prerequisites beyond required parameters.

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