wafeq_warehouses_update

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

Annotations already establish that this is a mutating, idempotent, non-destructive operation, so the description adds little behavioral context. The PUT method is mentioned but not explained as full-replacement semantics; no details about overwritten fields, required permissions, or side effects are provided.

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 short and front-loaded with the endpoint and write intent, but “Update warehouse” and “Endpoint for updating an existing warehouse” are redundant. Every line does not earn its place, though the overall size is reasonable.

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 write operation with a nested required body and a dedicated partial_update sibling, this description is incomplete. It omits the full-vs-partial distinction, the effect of not sending optional fields, and any return/error behavior, leaving the agent to infer critical usage details from the schema alone.

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 description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema. The id parameter lacks a schema description and is not explained, and the body parameter is described with generic serializer boilerplate rather than the fact that it must supply the full warehouse representation for this PUT update.

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 identifies the resource (Warehouses), the operation (update), and the HTTP endpoint (PUT /warehouses/{id}/). It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling partial_update tool, but the verb and resource are unambiguous.

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 is given about when to choose this full update over wafeq_warehouses_partial_update, which appears in the sibling list. The description does not state that body must contain the full set of required fields or any conditions/preconditions for calling the endpoint.

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