Update Company Checklist Section

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

Annotations show readOnlyHint=false (mutation) and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that only supplied fields are changed (partial update) and returns the modified object. No contradictions. Additional context on the mutating behavior is provided beyond 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 four sentences, including a redundant line about required parameters and an API endpoint path. The second and third sentences contain a term error ('Inspections' vs 'Sections'). Could be more concise but not excessively long.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description correctly states it returns the modified object. Parameters are fully specified via schema. It does not cover error conditions or prerequisites, but for a simple update tool, the provided information is largely sufficient.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description repeats that company_id and id are required, and the parameter names/descriptions in the schema are sufficient. The description adds no new meaning beyond 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 the verb (updates) and resource (Checklist Section for a specified Company). It distinguishes from sibling CRUD tools. However, it mistakenly refers to 'Inspections' instead of 'Sections' in two places, which slightly undermines clarity.

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 indicates partial update behavior ('only the supplied fields are changed') and lists required parameters. It does not compare to alternatives (e.g., create, delete) or specify when not to use this tool. Guidance is present but minimal.

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