update_an_account_new

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds 'Modifies an existing record in place. Idempotent,' which confirms mutation and idempotency but adds little beyond annotations. It does not disclose return value, authorization needs, or 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 mostly concise but contains repetition ('Update an account' appears twice). The first line with emoji and method is useful, but the overall structure could eliminate 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?

The description lacks critical context for a complex nested schema: it does not mention return value (no output schema), whether the update is partial or full (PATCH-like?), or highlight important schema notes like the currency field requiring cents. The information is incomplete for an agent to use effectively.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for all parameters. The tool description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Update an account' and includes the HTTP method and resource. It avoids ambiguity but does not elaborate on specific fields or distinguish from potential sibling update tools, though none exist in the sibling list.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states it modifies an existing record, but does not explicitly contrast with create or other update tools. The sibling list includes many update tools, but no usage differentiation is provided.

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