pipedrive_update_project

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

Annotations already indicate it's not read-only, not destructive, and idempotent. Description adds useful context: 'Requires the Projects add-on; Projects API is in public beta.' No contradictions.

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?

Extremely concise: single sentence plus parenthetical. Front-loads the primary action. No wasted words.

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 13 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. Does not explain return value or behavior changes. Add-on requirement is noted, but lacks behavioral details expected for a mutation 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%, so schema already describes all 13 parameters with reasonable descriptions. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Update an existing project in Pipedrive.' Verb ('Update') and resource ('project') are specific. Distinguishes from sibling tools like 'pipedrive_create_project' and 'pipedrive_archive_project' by virtue of the action.

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?

Implied usage by tool name, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus other project-related tools. Mentions add-on requirement, but does not provide when-not or alternative selection criteria.

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