update_provider

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds a warning emoji and instruction to confirm with the user, which aligns with the destructive nature. However, it does not disclose other behaviors like partial update, idempotency, or effects on related entities.

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 with three elements: a warning, the action, and a reference. It is front-loaded with the warning. While short, it wastes no words, but could be more informative 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 the tool's complexity (22 parameters, destructive hint, and many sibling tools), the description is incomplete. It lacks parameter descriptions, update semantics explanation, and details about the output schema, relying on an external reference.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description provides no information about what each of the 22 parameters means or their constraints. The only reference is to 'Ver create_provider para valores válidos', which is insufficient for understanding the semantics of each field.

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 'Actualiza un proveedor' (updates a provider), providing a specific verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like create_provider or delete_provider, which are similar but different actions.

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_customer. The only usage notes are to confirm with the user and refer to create_provider for valid values, which is minimal and does not help with tool selection.

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