Update customer

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a mutation (update) but does not mention whether it performs partial updates, how missing fields are handled, whether it validates input, what happens if the customer does not exist, or any error behavior.

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 concise sentence that communicates the core action without waste. However, it is under-specified for a tool with many parameters and no annotations, so it does not fully earn its place as the only descriptive text.

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 (16 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. It fails to explain return values, error scenarios, or which fields are supported for update, leaving the agent without crucial decision-making information.

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 has 16 parameters with only 13% description coverage (customerNumber and currency). The description adds no parameter-level meaning, merely saying 'update an existing customer' without explaining any fields or the update semantics.

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 tool updates an existing customer in e-conomic, which identifies the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_customers and get_customer, though it does not enumerate which fields can be updated.

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?

No explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any preconditions (e.g., customer must exist). Usage is only implied by the verb 'update', but there is no context about when to choose this over other tools.

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