Update Cost Code

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

Discloses partial update behavior, success return ('Returns the modified cost code on success'), and failure modes with specific HTTP statuses (401, 403, 404). This goes beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true) without contradicting them.

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?

Eight sentences with each earning its place: purpose, partial update, id resolution, return, errors, required params, API context, endpoint. Slight redundancy in repeating required parameters already present in the schema, but overall efficiently organized and front-loaded.

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?

Covers all key aspects for an update tool: what it does, how to perform partial updates, prerequisite resolution, return value, error scenarios, and API location. No output schema exists, but the description adequately describes the success response. Complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 already covers all four parameters with 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds the partial-update nuance ('omitted fields keep their current values') and clarifies that id must resolve to an existing parent record, enriching the cost_code object semantics 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 opens with 'Update a specific Cost Code,' a clear verb+resource statement. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_cost_code, show_cost_code, and list_cost_codes by focusing exclusively on modification semantics.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: 'Send only the fields you intend to change; omitted fields keep their current values' and instructs to resolve the id with the matching list tool first. It doesn't explicitly contrast with create/show tools, but the workflow is clear.

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