Patch coupon

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'partial update' and 'XML IF,' but does not explain side effects, whether unspecified fields remain unchanged, required permissions, or any rate limits. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It lacks necessary details about the tool's behavior and parameters, so the phrase does not earn its place as a useful specification.

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 (one nested object parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It neither explains the meaning of 'XML IF' nor provides enough context for an agent to correctly invoke the tool with appropriate field mappings.

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 0% description coverage, and the only parameter 'fields' is an arbitrary object with no property details. The description does not enumerate valid coupon fields, value formats, or provide examples, so it fails to compensate for the schema 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 'クーポン部分更新' (coupon partial update) clearly identifies the action as a partial update on the coupon resource, which distinguishes it from the full update tool rms_update_coupon. However, it largely restates the title and does not specify which fields can be updated or explain the 'XML IF' suffix, leaving some ambiguity.

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 like rms_update_coupon or rms_get_coupon. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, so the agent receives no decision-support information.

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