Update Company Exchange Rates

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false. Description adds behavioral context: partial update (only supplied fields changed), returns modified object on success, and identifies the API endpoint. However, it does not disclose error handling, auth requirements, or rate limits.

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 with 4 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and usage. Efficiently conveys key information without redundancy.

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 2 params and no output schema, description covers purpose, usage, behavior, and required parameters. Lacks output structure details, but the promise of returning 'modified object' suffices.

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 has full descriptions for both parameters (company_id as path param, exchange_rates as body field). Description merely restates required parameters and the partial update behavior for exchange_rates, adding minimal 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?

Description clearly states it updates company exchange rates by company ID, specifying that it updates existing Currency Configurations with partial update semantics ('only the supplied fields are changed'). Distinguishes from sibling tools (create_company_exchange_rates, get_company_exchange_rates) by emphasizing 'update existing'.

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?

Description indicates use for updating existing configurations but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (create or get). Provides basic context but lacks when-not-to-use or exclusion guidance.

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