update_product_review

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

Discloses that changes take effect immediately, average rating updates if rating changes, and operation is irreversible but can be overwritten. Provides sufficient behavioral insight for a mutation tool without 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?

Description is well-structured with sections (purpose, API, return, side effects). Every sentence is informative and concise. No fluff.

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?

Covers return structure (dict with success, resource_id, message), side effects, and usage context. For a simple single-update tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is complete and sufficient.

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% and description adds value beyond schema by listing example updatable fields (status, content, rating) and providing a sample for review_data. Parameter descriptions are clear.

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?

Starts with '[WRITE]' and clearly states '更新單筆商品評論' (update a single product review). Lists specific purposes: modifying content, status, rating. Distinct from sibling tools like create_product_review, delete_product_review, and bulk_update_product_reviews.

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?

Explicitly states usage context: '適用於客服審核或編輯不當評論' (suitable for customer service review or editing inappropriate comments). Implicitly distinguishes from bulk vs single updates but does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternatives.

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