Update Tax Code

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

Annotations indicate non-readonly, non-destructive. The description adds that only supplied fields are changed (partial update) and returns the modified object. It also gives the API category and endpoint, providing useful behavioral context 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, front-loading the main purpose. It includes endpoint and API details which are useful but add length. Overall efficient with minimal 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?

With no output schema, the description usefully states 'returns the modified object'. It also provides the API category and endpoint. For an update operation with 9 parameters, it covers the essential behavioral aspects and return value, though could mention idempotency.

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 the input schema already documents parameters. The description only mentions required parameters id and company_id, adding no new 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 clearly states it updates a Tax Code's attributes, using the verb 'update' and specifying the resource as 'Tax Code'. It mentions 'Tax records' which is slightly ambiguous but overall is clear and distinct from create or list operations.

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 provides context: 'Use this to update an existing Tax records' and notes that only supplied fields are changed. It lists required parameters (id, company_id) but does not explicitly exclude creation or other operations, lacking comparison with siblings like create_tax_code.

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