Update Sales Quotation

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds no context about the update semantics (e.g., partial vs full replacement, error behavior, or effects on related data).

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 a single concise sentence with no waste, but it could be more informative without losing brevity (e.g., mentioning scope or behavior).

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 should explain return values or success/failure indicators. It also lacks detail on prerequisites, side effects, or typical usage patterns for this ERP update tool.

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% with parameter descriptions, and the tool description provides no additional meaning beyond the schema (e.g., 'fields' is described as 'Header fields to update' in both).

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 clearly states the action ('Update') and resource ('fields on an existing sales quotation header'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like s4_sales_quotation_get or s4_sales_quotation_create.

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?

Usage is implied by the tool name and description (when you need to update an existing quotation), but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives for other types of updates (e.g., line items).

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