dealdesk.patch_quote_preset

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

With zero annotations, the description does carry useful load: 'replace' discloses destructive overwrite semantics rather than merge, and it scopes side effects (existing quotes are untouched). It says nothing about permissions, whether omitted arrays are cleared vs. left alone, or partial-update semantics for scalar fields.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the mutation semantics and followed immediately by the scoping caveat. No filler.

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?

A 7-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and near-zero schema documentation needs far more: the discountAmount omission, replace-vs-merge behavior per collection, and authorization/project-scoping expectations are all unaddressed. The output schema covers return values, but the input contract remains underspecified.

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 only 14% (just projectId), so the description must compensate. It names only 4 of 7 parameters (name, groups, lineItems, options) with no structural detail, and discountAmount — arguably the most ambiguous field — is never mentioned at all.

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?

States specific verbs (rename, replace) against a specific resource (quote preset) and enumerates the affected fields. An agent can distinguish it from list_quote_presets / get_quote_preset / apply_quote_preset, though the description never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

'Does not change quotes already created from it' implicitly signals when-not (use a quote-level tool if the goal is to affect existing quotes), but no alternative is named and no prerequisites are given. Usage must be inferred rather than read.

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