update_business_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only states 'update' which implies mutation, but lacks details on partial vs. full updates, required permissions, success/error behavior, or side effects. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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?

A single concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then enumerates fields. There is no wasted verbiage.

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?

The tool has zero required parameters, six optional properties, no output schema, and no annotations. The description is adequate for a simple update but lacks behavioral context (e.g., whether it's a partial update) and how it relates to get_business_profile. The schema covers parameter constraints, but the description doesn't enrich operational context.

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 baseline is 3. The description lists the same field names as the schema without adding extra meaning, such as constraints or interdependencies. It doesn't compensate beyond the schema's property 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?

The description uses the specific verb 'Update' and identifies the resource as 'WhatsApp Business Profile fields', listing all relevant fields. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_business_profile, which reads the profile.

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 implies usage (to update profile fields) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_business_profile for reading). No conditions or exclusions are given, so the guidance is only implicit.

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