brc_update_product

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It reveals the two-step preflight behavior, including the return of 'confirmation_required' and a 'payload preview' on the first call. It does not mention error handling or permissions, but the core behavioral trait is well disclosed.

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 only three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: state intent, describe the required workflow, and clarify a critical nuance. No redundant information, perfectly 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 no output schema, the description covers the key preflight flow but omits details on error conditions, final success response, or handling of partial updates. For a tool with 5 parameters and nested objects, it is fairly complete but could be improved with post-update behavior.

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%, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate. The description adds value by explaining the 'confirmWrite' parameter's role in the two-step flow and reinforcing 'merged fields' for payload/updates. The other parameters (id, companyName) are adequately covered by schema.

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 'Updates a BRC product using merged fields.' This specifies the verb (update) and resource (BRC product). It does not explicitly distinguish from the create tool or other update tools, but the name and first sentence are sufficiently clear for a focused purpose.

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 explicit step-by-step instructions: 'First call without confirmWrite: true... then retry with confirmWrite: true only after explicit user confirmation.' It also clarifies a common mistake: 'Passing preflight is not confirmation.' This is excellent guidance for correct tool invocation.

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