pipedrive_notes_update

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only says 'Update', which implies mutation. No details on permissions, idempotency, side effects, or error states are given, such as whether the note must exist or if partial updates are supported.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the primary action and targets. It avoids redundant information but could expand slightly without losing conciseness.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain the pin flag behaviors, required fields, return value, or error scenarios, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 description references 'content and pin flags', which maps to content_html and the three boolean flags, but does not explain their purpose or constraints. Schema coverage is 40%, and the description adds minimal context beyond the schema property names.

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 clearly states the tool updates a note's content and pin flags, distinguishing it from create, delete, get, and list operations of sibling tools. The verb 'update' and resource 'note' are specific, and the mention of fields provides clarity.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pipedrive_notes_create or pipedrive_notes_update. There are no mentions of prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and schema.

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