Modifier un(e) produit

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by stating that only provided fields are modified (partial update). Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true, which aligns. While it does not detail all side effects or authorization needs, it provides key behavioral insight.

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 very concise: two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds key behavior and return info. No wasted words; information is front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description mentions returns updated data. It covers the partial update behavior. For a simple update tool, this is adequate. It could mention error handling or constraints, but overall complete for its complexity.

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%, so the input schema already describes each parameter. The description reinforces the partial update behavior but does not add new meaning to individual parameters beyond what the schema provides.

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 clearly states it updates an existing product in BoondManager. The title 'Modifier un(e) produit' reinforces this. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create, delete, get, and search by its specific verb and resource.

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 mentions that only provided fields are modified, which is a useful usage hint for partial updates. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create or delete). No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are provided.

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