patch-crm-v4-objects-objtype-objid_objid

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden. It only says 'Update' and gives an example, but does not disclose whether this is a partial merge or full replacement, what happens on missing fields, authentication needs, or idempotency. The 'body' wrapper in the example may also confuse parameter mapping.

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 three short pieces: verb, requirement, example. It's compact and front-loaded with 'Update.' The example earns its place but could be formatted better.

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?

No annotations, no output schema, and minimal description. It doesn't explain return values, error cases, or the role of objectType/objectId. For a core update operation, it's incomplete.

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 covers all 3 parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds an example showing the body structure with 'properties' inside 'body,' but this example uses a 'body' key not present in the schema's top-level parameters, potentially confusing rather than clarifying. Still, it reinforces the format of properties.

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 opens with 'Update,' a clear verb, and the example shows updating properties like firstname and email. The tool name and schema confirm it patches a CRM object, but it does not distinguish from sibling patch-crm-v3 tool.

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?

The description states 'REQUIRES body parameter with properties to update,' giving a usage prerequisite. However, it offers no guidance on when to choose this tool over other update tools like post-crm-v4-objects-objtype-batch-update or patch-crm-v3, and no exclusions.

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