Update Work Order Contract

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true), the description discloses partial update behavior, success return value, and specific error statuses (401, 403, 404). This adds meaningful behavioral context without contradicting any 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 front-loaded with the purpose and each sentence carries useful information, including error handling and API details. It is slightly dense with request/response details but remains well-organized and not bloated.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description explains the return value and failure modes, and lists required parameters. It does not describe the nested work_order_contract object's structure, but the instruction to resolve id with the list tool implies the agent can obtain the structure, filling the gap.

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 value by explaining the partial update semantics for all parameters and emphasizing that id must be resolved via the list tool, which enriches the schema's field-level documentation.

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 specified Work Order Contract,' clearly identifying the action (update) and the resource (Work Order Contract), which distinguishes it from create, show, or delete siblings. The use of 'specified' confirms it targets an existing record, reinforcing its purpose.

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?

It instructs to 'resolve it with the matching list tool first' and to 'send only the fields you intend to change,' giving practical usage guidance. It does not explicitly name alternative update tools (e.g., update_work_order_contract_subcontractor_sov_status), but the context is clear enough for selecting this tool.

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