entry_update

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'Update an existing entry,' omitting whether updates are partial or full, how repeating entries are handled, or any side effects. The schema hints at updateMode but the description itself is silent.

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, focused sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is concise and front-loaded, with no unnecessary words or repetition.

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 tool's complexity (nine parameters, nested objects, an enum) and lack of output schema or annotations, the one-line description is insufficient. It does not explain update semantics, return values, or error behavior, leaving significant gaps for an agent to navigate.

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 coverage is 100%, with detailed descriptions for all nine parameters including enums and nested objects. The description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema provides, 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 uses a specific verb ('Update') and clearly identifies the resource ('existing entry in Toshl Finance'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like entry_create and entry_delete, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or special cases.

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 siblings like entry_manage or entry_create. There are no stated exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tool references, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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