card_update_restrictions

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It clearly discloses SCA requirement, polling behavior (default wait=30s), fallback to pending response, and the two-step flow via sca_session_token. However, it does not clarify whether unspecified restrictions are overwritten or merged, and lacks detail on authorization beyond SCA.

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 concise sentences with no fluff. First sentence states purpose, second sentence provides critical SCA behavior. Information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description does not describe the success response format beyond mentioning a 'structured pending response' for SCA. It also omits prerequisites or state constraints. While adequate for basic use, it leaves gaps for complete agent understanding.

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 baseline is 3. The description reiterates the parameter themes (active days, merchant categories) but adds no deeper meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions for id, wait, categories, active_days, and sca_session_token.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Update' and the resource 'card's restrictions' with specific fields (active days, merchant categories). It distinguishes from sibling tools like card_update_limits and card_update_nickname by focusing solely on restrictions.

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 does not explicitly compare to sibling tools or provide when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance. It only implicitly suggests use for updating restrictions, but lacks context on when to prefer this over card_update_limits or other update tools.

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