patch-crm-v3-objects-line_items-var_var

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosure. It does not mention that this operation modifies an existing line item, whether it is partial or full update, what happens to unspecified fields, or any permission requirements. This is a significant gap for a mutating tool.

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?

While extremely short, the description is under-specified rather than concise. A single word 'Update' lacks the necessary details to be useful, and the structure provides no front-loaded benefit.

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 the tool's complexity (3 parameters, nested properties object), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is woefully incomplete. It provides no information on return values, error conditions, or behavior, making it impossible for an agent to use this tool effectively.

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?

The schema provides descriptions for all three parameters (100% coverage), but the tool description adds no additional meaning. The parameter names and schema descriptions are somewhat generic (e.g., 'Key value pairs representing the properties of the object'), yet the description fails to clarify expected format or semantics beyond what the schema already states.

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 is simply 'Update', which tautologically restates the verb 'patch' from the tool name without identifying the resource (line items) or any specific action. It fails to distinguish from sibling patch tools (e.g., patch-crm-v3-objects-objtype-objid_objid) and provides no object context.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool or how it relates to alternatives. The description offers no context for selecting between this and other PATCH endpoints for different object types, nor any prerequisites or caveats.

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