update_price_alert

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It mentions key behaviors: null clears thresholds, premium restriction, toggle enable/disable. However, it omits details like error handling, idempotency, or side effects.

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 sentences deliver purpose and key usage details upfront. No redundant text. The description is 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?

For a simple update tool with 4 parameters (mostly optional) and no output schema, the description covers core behavior, restrictions, and toggling. It lacks return value info but is generally complete given the tool's simplicity.

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 25% (only id described). The description adds essential context: null clears increasePct/decreasePct, isActive toggles without deletion. This compensates well for the sparse 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 'Update an existing price alert', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_price_alert and delete_price_alert by focusing on modification.

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 usage details: how to clear thresholds with null (Premium-only restriction) and toggling isActive. It implies when to use (update existing alerts) but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools. Still, it offers good guidance.

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