update_store_customer

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint false) and the description confirms it updates a customer. It specifies that only fields provided in additional_fields are changed and returns the updated JSON object. Does not detail permissions or side effects, but adds value beyond annotations.

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 concise and well-structured: purpose, partial update behavior, context, then Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value without fluff.

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 has 4 parameters and an output schema, the description covers inputs and output adequately. It provides context about automatic sync vs manual updates. Could mention error handling or required permissions, but is largely complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by explaining store_id, customer_id, and additional_fields (with examples like opt_in_status, first_name, etc.). The account parameter is not described, but it is optional and the main parameters are well-covered.

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 action ('Update') and resource ('existing store customer'), lists specific updatable fields (name, opt-in status, address, company), and notes that manual writes are for custom/headless storefronts. This distinguishes it from create, delete, get, and list customer 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 explains when to use the tool (manual updates for custom/headless stores) and notes that many stores sync automatically. It does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternative tools, but the context is clear.

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