Update Potential Change Order

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

Annotations indicate read-only and destructive hints, but the description adds valuable context: partial update semantics, requirement for existing id, return value on success, and specific error codes (401, 403, 404). This goes well beyond the annotations without contradiction.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the core action. It is slightly verbose with redundant 'Required parameters' line, but every other sentence provides meaningful guidance. Not overlong, and useful details are included.

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?

Given a nested object parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, update semantics, precondition, return value, error behavior, and endpoint. It doesn't detail the change_order object structure, but that is likely beyond the necessary scope.

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. The description adds extra meaning for the id parameter (must be an existing parent record, resolve with list tool) and clarifies that change_order is a partial update object. This adds value 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 'Update information about a specific Potential Change Order (PCO)' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like create_potential_change_order, list_potential_change_orders, and show_potential_change_orders by specifying 'Update' and 'specific'.

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 instructs to resolve the id with the matching list tool first, and explains the partial update behavior ('Send only the fields you intend to change'). It does not explicitly spell out when not to use the tool, but the prerequisite guidance is strong.

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