bw_update_infoobject

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

With no annotations, description fully disclose side effects: replaces all attributes, internal sequence (lock, GET, PUT, activate, unlock), and supports both Characteristic and KYF updates. No contradictions.

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?

Two succinct sentences. First sentence states purpose, second provides essential behavioral details. No 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?

Covers core behaviors for both InfoObject types and internal sequence. Lacks error conditions or prerequisite notes, but sufficient given no output schema.

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 has 100% coverage, but description adds significant context: explains that ommitting description keeps existing, attributes replaces list, transport required for non-local packages, and groups parameters by InfoObject type.

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?

Description clearly states the tool updates a Characteristic InfoObject, with specifics on changing description, replacing attributes, and handling Key Figure updates. It distinguishes from siblings like bw_create_infoobject and bw_get_infoobject.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, but the purpose is clear. Implied usage for updating existing InfoObjects, but no comparison with alternatives like bw_delete or bw_move_object.

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