PATCH /fields/{id}

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond saying 'Update a custom field' and a generated note, so it does not explain what destruction is possible or when confirmation is required.

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 short and front-loads the operation name. The second sentence, 'Generated from Snipe-IT OpenAPI operation fieldsid-2,' is boilerplate that does not help an agent invoke the tool correctly.

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?

This is a destructive mutation with nested parameters, a required confirm string, and no output schema. The description should explain usage conditions, destructive implications, and the confirmation requirement, but instead provides only a one-line summary.

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%, and the nested body properties (name, element) have no descriptions. The description does not clarify the body fields or the confirm parameter beyond what the schema already provides, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 states a clear verb and resource: updating a custom field via PATCH /fields/{id}. However, it does not distinguish this operation from the many sibling field tools such as snipeit_gen_update_fields, snipeit_gen_fieldsid_1, or snipeit_raw_request, so an agent cannot confidently choose it without external context.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of the confirm parameter or destructive behavior in prose. The only usage information is the HTTP method and path.

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