put_addresses_by_address_reference_id

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-destructive mutation. The description adds the HTTP method and endpoint, but does not discuss idempotency, partial update semantics, or validation behavior. It provides minimal additional 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 very concise, consisting of a single line with essential info (action, permission, endpoint). It is front-loaded and to the point, but it may be too terse given the complexity of the tool (12 parameters, no output schema).

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 the tool has 12 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the response looks like, error conditions, or whether it supports partial updates. The agent lacks context to fully understand the tool's behavior beyond the schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to explain parameters. The description adds no additional parameter-level insight beyond what the schema already provides.

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 address' as the action, and the name and endpoint make it specific to updating an address by reference ID. However, it does not elaborate on what fields or behaviors are unique to this tool compared to other update tools, but the sibling context makes it distinguishable.

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 mentions the required permission ('Account information, Edit') but lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like creating a new address (post_addresses) or reading an address (get_addresses_by_address_reference_id). No prerequisites or restrictions are mentioned.

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