Update Budget Modification

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

The description states that the tool updates existing Budget records and returns the modified object, which matches the readOnlyHint=false annotation. It also mentions partial update behavior ('only the supplied fields are changed') and the deprecation. No contradictions 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 fairly concise given the amount of information: condition, deprecation, link, usage, required params, endpoint. It is front-loaded with the most important condition. Slightly wordy but generally well-structured.

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 covers the main purpose, condition, and required parameters, but lacks details on return value structure (though it says 'returns the modified object'), error conditions, or permissions. Given the tool has 8 parameters and no output schema, more guidance on the response would improve completeness.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage (8 parameters all described), so the baseline is 3. The description lists required parameters but does not add new meaning beyond what the schema provides. It mentions one note about from_budget_line_item_id, but that is also in the schema.

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 that the tool updates a Budget Modification under the specific condition that Budget Changes are not enabled. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_budget_modification and list_budget_modifications by focusing on updates and the deprecation context.

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 explicitly states the condition ('only if Budget Changes are not enabled') and provides a link to upgrade documentation for the alternative Budget Changes API. It lists required parameters and notes the partial update behavior. However, it could more directly instruct when NOT to use this tool (e.g., after deprecation date).

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