Put Instances Customers Virtual Accounts By Id

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so safety characteristics are covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no mention of required permissions, whether omitted fields are cleared or preserved, or what the idempotency window means in practice.

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 single sentence contains zero waste but also zero information; it is under-specification rather than conciseness. There is nothing front-loaded because there is nothing to front-load.

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 mutating tool with a required nested request body, no output schema, and half the parameters undocumented, the description is completely inadequate. An agent cannot know what the update changes or what a successful response contains.

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 only 40% and five parameters exist, including a nested requestBody with token enum, blockchain_wallet_id, and partner_fee_id that carry no descriptions. The description supplies no parameter meaning at all, so it fails to compensate for the low coverage.

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?

"Update Virtual Account" only restates the tool name/title with no added specificity. It doesn't indicate scope (which fields of a virtual account can be updated), nor how it differs from GetV1InstancesCustomersVirtualAccountsById or PostV1InstancesCustomersVirtualAccounts.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus its siblings. An agent is left to infer from the HTTP verb that this modifies an existing virtual account rather than creating or fetching one, but no prerequisites, preconditions, or alternatives are named.

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