subscription_localizations_update_instance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It states PATCH and points at a body schema, but says nothing about permissions, partial-vs-full update semantics, side effects, idempotency, or response behavior for this mutation.

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 short and front-loads the HTTP route, but the route is duplicated verbatim in parentheses, wasting space. It reads as an auto-generated route reference rather than a task-oriented sentence.

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?

For an update mutation with a nested JSON:API body, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too thin. It defers all field-level semantics to an external OpenAPI component and omits what the tool returns or requires operationally.

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 the baseline is 3; both id and body are already documented in the schema. The description only restates the HTTP path id and repeats the body schema reference already present in the schema, adding no extra parameter meaning.

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?

States a specific HTTP verb and resource path (PATCH /v1/subscriptionLocalizations/{id}) and names the request body schema. However, it never says in plain language that this updates an existing subscription localization, and it does not distinguish this v1 tool from the v2 update sibling, so an agent must infer the operation from REST conventions.

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 when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are provided. The PATCH path implies an update, but nothing routes the agent between this tool and subscription_localizations_v2_update_instance or explains when a PATCH is appropriate.

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