plu_update_exchange_dates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should fully disclose behavioral traits. It states 'Update exchange dates' but does not clarify if the operation is destructive, requires authentication, or modifies existing data (overwrites vs. appends). The imperative to confirm hints at mutability but lacks detail.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The critical instruction is highlighted via 'IMPORTANT' – front-loaded and efficient.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It states the action and a key requirement, but omits details about return values, error handling, and constraints (e.g., date ordering, timezones). An agent might need additional context to invoke safely.

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 67% (format strings for dates, no description for exchangeId). The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, missing an opportunity to explain the relationship between start and end dates, valid ranges, or how exchangeId is obtained.

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 'Update exchange dates' – a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like plu_cancel_exchange, plu_create_exchange, etc., which deal with different aspects of exchanges.

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 includes 'IMPORTANT: ask user confirmation,' which provides explicit guidance on user interaction. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like plu_update_exchange_type, nor does it mention prerequisites or side effects.

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