update_customer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only mentions the HTTP method (PUT), which implies idempotence, but doesn't clarify what happens if the customer doesn't exist, whether it's a partial update, or any side effects. No auth or rate limit info.

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 extremely brief, only one sentence. While it is front-loaded, it omits critical information. It could be expanded without losing structure.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It lacks guidance on required parameters' meaning, return behavior, and error conditions. This tool requires much more 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 only 13%, meaning 7 out of 8 parameters lack description. The tool description adds no parameter information whatsoever, leaving the agent to rely solely on the schema, which is inadequate.

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', the resource 'customer', and specifies it is for existing customers. It also shows the HTTP mapping, which clarifies the operation. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_customer.

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, no prerequisites, and no conditions for usage. It is implied only by the tool name and verb.

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