Update Purchase Order

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the destructive nature is known. Description adds no further behavioral context such as side effects, partial update behavior, or error scenarios. Adequate but no added value.

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?

Single sentence, no redundancy, front-loaded. Every word is meaningful and earned.

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?

For a simple update tool with 2 parameters and annotations present, the description is minimally complete. However, it lacks return value expectations and does not warn about any prerequisites besides having the purchase order number.

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 provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. However, the 'fields' object is open-ended (additionalProperties allowed) and description does not clarify valid field names or constraints. This is a significant gap for an agent to know what header fields are updatable.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'update' and resource 'purchase order header'. It distinguishes from sibling create/get/list tools by specifying 'existing'. No ambiguity.

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?

Description implies usage when you need to modify an existing purchase order header, but does not provide explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools. Sibling tools exist (create, get, list) but no guidance on choosing between them.

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