Update Furniture

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

Description adds behavioral context beyond idempotentHint annotation: it confirms partial update (only provided fields changed) and automatic recalculation of annual depreciation when amount or duration change. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no extraneous text. Every sentence adds value.

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 only idempotent annotation, the description covers partial update and depreciation but does not address validation rules, return values, or what happens with invalid inputs.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It explains that 'amount' is in euros and that 'duration_years' affects depreciation. However, other parameters (tva_rate, description, is_dedicated, purchase_date, is_second_hand) are not clarified, leaving gaps.

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?

Description clearly states it updates an existing furniture item. Verb 'update' and resource 'furniture' are specific. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'create_furniture' or 'delete_furniture', but the word 'existing' implies update.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_furniture' or 'delete_furniture'. No prerequisites or context for usage are provided.

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