Update account contact details / preferences

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

The description reveals key behavioral traits beyond the annotations: it reads the current account form, modifies only the specified fields, re-saves the rest verbatim, and requires confirm:true or else performs a dry run. This is critical for safe usage and fully covers the tool's side effects, especially given annotations only indicate readOnlyHint:false and openWorldHint:true.

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?

Two sentences, immediately front-loaded with the tool's purpose, and every clause serves a purpose. No unnecessary filler or repetition.

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?

The description covers the core operation: reads current form, updates specified fields, re-saves, and explains the confirm/dry-run mechanism. It does not describe the success response or error cases, but given there is no output schema and the tool is moderately complex, the coverage is solid.

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%, so every parameter already has a description. The description adds context about the selective-field behavior and confirm:true dry-run, but it does not provide per-parameter details beyond what the schema already offers. This aligns with the baseline of 3.

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 begins with 'Update your contact details and/or notification preferences' – a specific verb (Update) and resource (account), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_account, list_invoices, and healthcheck. The scope is explicit and unambiguous.

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?

Clear context: use this tool when the goal is to change account contact details or notification preferences. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion scenarios, but the read-modify-write behavior and confirm requirement are clearly stated, giving useful context for when to invoke it.

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