update_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Update an existing inventory item,' implying a mutation operation, but does not disclose permissions needed, whether changes are reversible, rate limits, or what the response looks like. This is inadequate for a tool with potential 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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it front-loaded and easy to parse. It directly conveys the core action without unnecessary details.

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 (7 parameters, mutation operation) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or behavioral nuances, leaving critical gaps for an AI agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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 43%, with only 'id', 'tag_price', and 'split' having descriptions. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining 'title' or 'quantity' usage. With moderate coverage, the baseline is 3, as the description does not compensate for the 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?

The description 'Update an existing inventory item' clearly states the verb ('Update') and resource ('inventory item'), making the purpose understandable. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'update_account' or 'update_batch_status', which also update resources, so it lacks specificity to distinguish among them.

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, such as 'create_item' for new items or 'delete_item' for removal. It mentions 'existing inventory item' but does not specify prerequisites, exclusions, or contextual cues, leaving usage unclear.

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