update_rental_tenant

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. The description merely states 'Update an existing rental tenant' without mentioning side effects, partial updates, permissions, idempotency, or any other behavioral traits. This is insufficient for a mutation tool, scoring 1.

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 front-loaded and brief, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It contains a single short sentence that does not explain key aspects, making it inappropriately small for a tool with nested parameters. Score 2.

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 (nested tenant_data object, many sibling update tools) and the absence of annotations, this description is severely incomplete. It fails to provide any context for when to use it, prerequisites, or what fields tenant_data expects. Even with an output schema present, the description lacks essential operational context, scoring 1.

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 includes tenant_id and tenant_data, but the description provides no explanation of what these parameters mean or how they interact. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate, but it does not, so it scores 1.

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 identifies the action (update) and the resource (existing rental tenant), which distinguishes it from tools like update_rental or update_association_tenant. However, it lacks any additional scope or details that would further disambiguate it from closely related sibling tools, earning a 4 rather than a 5.

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 other update tools, such as update_lease or update_rental. There are no alternatives mentioned, no context, and no exclusions. This is a minimal statement with no usage direction, so it scores 2.

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