update_transaction

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that dry_run defaults to True, resolving references and reporting a plan without writing, and that passing dry_run=False commits the update. This is a key behavioral trait. It does not mention side effects or error handling, but covers the essential operational behavior.

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 concise: three sentences that front-load the purpose, then detail the change format and dry_run flag. Every sentence adds necessary information with no redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description should clarify what the tool returns (plan on dry_run, confirmation or error on commit). It mentions 'reports the plan' but does not specify the response format. Also, it lacks context on permissions or error scenarios. While core usage is covered, completeness is slightly lacking.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds detailed meaning for the 'changes' parameter (structure and fields) and 'dry_run' behavior. The 'txn_type' and 'txn_id' are not elaborated, but their purpose is clear from context. Overall, it adds significant value beyond the 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 it applies one or more field changes to a single transaction. The verb 'Apply' and resource 'transaction' are specific. It distinguishes from siblings like get_transaction (read) and find_transactions (search).

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 explains how to use the tool (change format, dry_run flag) but does not provide context on when to choose this tool over siblings. No explicit when/when-not or alternatives are mentioned, though the dry_run feature is well-explained for safe usage.

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