wa_phone_update_commerce_settings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Update commerce settings' implies a mutation operation but reveals nothing about required permissions, whether changes are reversible, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens to existing settings not mentioned. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is completely inadequate.

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 maximally concise at just two words. While this represents severe under-specification rather than ideal conciseness, from a pure structural perspective there's zero waste - every word directly contributes to the minimal purpose statement. No fluff or redundant phrasing exists.

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?

This is a mutation tool with 3 parameters, 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema. The description provides only a basic verb+object statement without explaining what commerce settings are, what parameters mean, what permissions are needed, what the operation does, or what it returns. For this level of complexity, the description is completely inadequate.

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 0%, meaning none of the 3 parameters (wabaId, phoneNumber, body) are documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter information whatsoever - it doesn't explain what wabaId or phoneNumber represent, what format they should be in, or what the body parameter should contain. The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema 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 'Update commerce settings' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'wa_phone_update_commerce_settings'. While it indicates the action (update) and target (commerce settings), it doesn't specify what commerce settings are or what resource they belong to. It doesn't distinguish this tool from its sibling 'wa_phone_update_profile' which also updates settings.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites, when this operation is appropriate, or how it differs from related tools like 'wa_phone_retrieve_commerce_settings' or 'wa_phone_update_profile'. The agent receives no contextual usage information.

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