update_componen_product

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only covers the additive behavior of image paths. It does not state whether other fields are overwritten or merged, what permissions are needed, or if updates are reversible. The nature of 'update' implies mutation but no safety or destructive warnings are given.

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 efficiently cover the purpose and a key behavioral note. No filler or repetition. Could be improved with bullet points for clarity but overall concise and 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 the tool's complexity (23 parameters, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It omits return values, error conditions, required field handling, and behavior for non-image fields. The description only addresses image behavior, leaving substantial gaps for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 only 17%, leaving most parameters undocumented. The description adds value only for image_paths (additive behavior). For the 19 other parameters, no additional meaning is provided beyond the schema, which itself is sparse. The description fails to compensate for low coverage.

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 the verb 'Update' and the resource 'componen product', establishing the core action. It also clarifies that image_paths are added rather than replaced. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling update tools like update_accessory or update_quotation beyond the resource name.

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?

Provides specific guidance on image handling: new images are added and deletion requires a separate tool. However, it lacks when-to-use context compared to alternatives like dashboard updates, and no prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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