Update a technician

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

The description goes beyond annotations by explaining the specific behavior of start_location_type='office' (re-snapshotting business address, ignoring body fields, error condition BUSINESS_LOCATION_MISSING) and start_location_type='home'. This adds valuable behavioral context.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Each sentence contributes meaningful information without redundancy.

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 the complexity of 12 parameters with interdependencies, the description covers the key behavioral nuances and error conditions. No output schema exists, but the description sufficiently addresses expected side effects.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the interaction between start_location_type and address/coordinates parameters, clarifying when certain fields are ignored or required.

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 'Updates mutable technician profile fields' and specifies the resource (technician). It distinguishes from sibling tools like createTechnician and deleteTechnician, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with list or get tools.

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 provides guidance on start_location_type behavior and when to use each option, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives among sibling tools. Usage context is implied rather than stated.

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