update_person

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Update a person in your CRM' reveals nothing about partial versus full replacement, reversibility, required permissions, or side effects — it barely restates the tool's name.

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 a single sentence and is not verbose, but 'in your CRM' is padding that adds no information. It is concise, though not informatively structured.

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?

This is a mutation tool with 11 optional fields, no annotations, and no output schema. The description provides zero guidance on critical behaviors like whether an update with only personId and name clears other fields, or how partial updates work. An agent has insufficient context to call this tool safely and correctly.

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 100%, with each of the 11 paramters getting its own description (including date format and null-to-clear semantics). The description adds no paramter detail, but the schema already carries that burden, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('a person in your CRM'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_person and list_people. However, it does not elaborate on what updating entails, so it stops short of being fully explanatory.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_person or add_interaction. The description merely states the operation without mentioning prerequisites, exclusions, or when not to use it.

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