Actualizar publicación

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

The annotations already mark the tool as destructive and non-read-only; the description adds the important real-world consequence that the change is visible to buyers and requires confirmation. This complements the annotations and does not contradict them.

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 compact sentence with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the warning about user confirmation follows naturally without adding unnecessary detail.

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?

It covers the essential risk warning for a side-effecting tool and names the affected fields. However, with low parameter schema coverage and no output schema, it leaves some parameter semantics and the full allowed estado values for the agent to infer.

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 40%, so the description needs to compensate. It identifies which fields can be edited and mentions active/paused states, but it omits the 'closed' enum value present in the schema and does not explain constraints or per-field behavior for precio, título, or estado.

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 the specific verb 'Modifica' and names the resource 'publicación EN MERCADOLIBRE' plus the affected fields (precio, stock, título, estado). It clearly distinguishes this tool from the sibling listing/report tools by describing a direct update operation.

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 gives one useful guideline: confirm with the user before executing because the write is real and visible to buyers. However, it does not state when to prefer this tool over siblings or when not to use it, so the usage context is only partially covered.

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