Cost Locations: update cost location

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

The description adds context beyond annotations by stating 'Modifies existing master data in place' and including the endpoint. Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description aligns with these.

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 concise: one emoji line, one bold statement, and one sentence of purpose. Every word adds value, and it is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 details about the response (e.g., no output schema) and error conditions. However, for a simple update tool, it provides the essential purpose and parameters. More context on behavior when code is missing would improve completeness.

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%, so the description adds little beyond what is already documented. It reiterates 'name/description,' which matches the schema's parameter description. 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 a cost location's name/description.' It uses the specific verb 'update' and identifies the resource (cost location), distinguishing it from siblings like cost_locations_add (create) and cost_locations_get.

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 implies usage for updating existing cost locations but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like cost_locations_add or cost_locations_delete. No guidance on exclusions or prerequisites is provided.

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