Update Object Schema

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

Beyond annotations (all false), the description adds the optimistic locking behavior. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, permissions, or other traits. The added context is moderate.

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 efficient sentences: first states purpose, second adds a critical prerequisite. No wasted words.

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 4-parameter update tool with no output schema, the description covers the main action and prerequisite. It does not mention the return value or whether it's a partial update, but the overall completeness is high 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats the revision requirement already in the schema, adding no new parameter semantics.

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 the resource 'account-level object schema', distinguishing it from create/delete siblings. It also mentions optimistic locking, adding specificity.

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 explicitly requires the revision number from get_object_schemas, providing a clear precondition. It does not discuss exclusions or alternatives, but the context is sufficient for a standard update operation.

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