update_income_charges

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

The description only includes a warning emoji and the bare action. Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. No additional behavior is disclosed, such as whether charges are replaced or merged, side effects, or required permissions.

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 very concise—one line with a warning emoji and a parameter template. It is front-loaded and efficient, though the template could be more structured.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown) and the destructive nature, the description is minimally complete. It provides the essential purpose and parameter structure, but lacks details on error states, return values, or behavior for missing income_id.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description provides a detailed template for the charges array: [{id?, paid, amount, date, payment_method, destination_account}]. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema, clarifying expected fields and that id is optional.

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 charges of an income ('Actualiza cobros de un ingreso'), which is specific and matches the name. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar sibling tools like update_income or update_invoice_charges, though the charge structure provides some distinction.

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 such as update_income (which might update income metadata) or update_invoice_charges (similar for invoices). The description lacks context for appropriate usage.

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