Update a deal fields

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

The description only reveals that it is a PATCH operation, implying partial updates, but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as idempotency, permission requirements, or side effects. With no annotations, more detail is expected.

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 very short but at the expense of clarity and completeness. It includes a redundant 'Tags: Deals' line that adds no information beyond the title.

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 objects, many optional fields, no output schema), the description is grossly insufficient. An agent cannot infer required fields, data formats, or response structure.

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 description does not mention any parameters, despite the input schema containing two complex objects (path, body) with many properties. Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description adds no value beyond the raw 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 the verb 'Update' and resource 'deal fields', making the purpose unambiguous. However, a sibling tool 'weeek_update_a_deal' exists with a very similar name, and the description does not differentiate between them, which could cause confusion.

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 alternatives (e.g., 'weeek_update_a_deal' or other deal-related tools). It lacks context on prerequisites, typical use cases, or when not to use it.

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