autotask_update_quote_item

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

The description implies a mutable operation (updating), but does not disclose any side effects, such as whether updates are persisted immediately, or if there are restrictions on changing certain fields after the quote is finalized. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, which it only partially addresses.

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 with only 7 words, efficiently conveying the core purpose without superfluous details. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Update' and the resource.

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 complexity (8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too minimal. It does not mention return values, error scenarios, or any constraints on updates. However, the schema itself is well-described, so the description's lack of depth is somewhat mitigated.

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?

The input schema covers all 8 parameters with descriptions, so schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by listing 'quantity, price, etc.', but does not elaborate on usage or constraints. The baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 quote items, listing example fields like quantity and price. However, it does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'autotask_create_quote_item', which is for creating, nor from 'autotask_search_quote_items' which is for reading. The verb 'update' and resource 'quote item' are specific, but the lack of scope differentiation prevents a top score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like creating a new item or deleting an item. No context is given about prerequisites, such as requiring the quote to be in a certain state, or when it's appropriate to update vs recreate.

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