update_company

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses key behavioral traits: it performs a partial POST, and omitted fields are preserved server-side. It also notes that required fields like company_name are kept automatically. This adds value beyond the schema.

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, with two sentences that efficiently convey the tool's purpose and the partial update mechanism. No unnecessary information is present.

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 11 parameters, zero schema descriptions, and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It lacks parameter explanations, prerequisites, and details about possible side effects or return values, though an output schema exists.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining parameter meaning, but it only provides a generic statement about non-None fields. No individual parameter semantics are given, leaving the user uninformed about each field's purpose.

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 explicitly states 'Update a company' and provides the API endpoint, clearly indicating the tool's function. It is easily distinguishable from sibling tools like create_company and get_company.

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 the partial update behavior ('Only non-None fields are forwarded; omitted fields are preserved'), which guides the user on how to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_company.

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