Update Manufacturing Resource

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=false, so the description's mention of 'partial update' adds a bit of context. But no additional behavioral traits are disclosed, such as authentication or error handling.

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?

Three concise sentences with zero waste. The most critical information (partial update) is front-loaded, followed by essential usage guidance.

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?

With an output schema present, the description adequately covers purpose, partial update behavior, and prerequisite step (get_schema). It could mention return value or errors, but the output schema likely fills that gap.

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%, but the description adds value by specifying that attribute field names must come from 'get_schema' and that only provided attributes change, going beyond the schema's definitions.

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 verb (update), resource (manufacturing resource), and scope (attributes, partial update). It distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'manufacturing' and 'partial update', avoiding confusion with the generic 'update_resource'.

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 advises using 'get_schema' first and clarifies that only provided attributes are changed. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from 'update_resource' or state when not to use this tool.

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