Modifier un(e) contact

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

Adds value beyond annotations by stating the partial update behavior and return of updated data. Annotations already show idempotentHint=true, so this is consistent and adds useful context.

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 sentences with no fluff. Every word serves a purpose. Structure is efficient: purpose, behavior, return value.

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 presence of output schema, parameter annotations, and no nested objects, the description is sufficient. Could mention error handling or auth requirements, but not critical for a simple update tool.

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?

Since schema coverage is 100%, description adds extra meaning by clarifying that only provided fields are modified. This helps the agent understand the patch-like nature beyond schema descriptions.

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 action ('Met à jour un(e) contact existant(e)'), the system ('BoondManager'), and the key behavior ('Seuls les champs fournis sont modifiés'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create, delete, get.

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?

Describes when to use (update an existing contact) and the partial update behavior. Lacks explicit exclusions or comparison to alternatives like 'use boond_contacts_get for reading'.

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