Update Prime Contract Line Item

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

The description adds that only supplied fields are changed (partial update) and that the modified object is returned, which supplements the annotations. However, it does not disclose potential errors, authorization 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?

The description is concise, front-loaded with the action, and efficiently uses a few sentences. It could be slightly more structured but is generally well-organized.

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 12 parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it notes partial update, required params, and return value. The endpoint URL is included, which aids context.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description lists required parameters separately but adds little meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter.

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 it updates a line item for a prime change order and that it performs a partial update. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like update_prime_contract_line_item_v1_0 or update_prime_contract_line_item_project, which could lead to confusion.

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 implies usage by stating 'Use this to update an existing Prime Contracts' and lists required parameters, but it provides no guidance on when not to use it or when alternatives (like create or delete) would be more appropriate.

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