Update contact

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

Annotations already indicate a mutation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds that it's a PATCH, which is a standard HTTP verb for partial updates. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, authorization needs, or response behavior. For a mutation tool, this is minimal but not contradictory.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the action ('PATCH a contact'), and contains no fluff. Every word earns its place.

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 tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and minimal annotations. The description does not explain return values, required contact_id, or the distinction between company and person contact fields. It is insufficient for an agent to fully understand behavior without additional information.

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?

Parameter schema coverage is only 20% (one parameter described). The description reinforces the PATCH semantics ('pass only fields to change') but adds no per-parameter meaning. The baseline is 3 given low coverage, and the description does not compensate for missing parameter descriptions.

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 updates a contact via PATCH. It distinguishes from create and delete siblings by using 'update' and the PATCH verb, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 says 'Pass only the fields you want to change,' which implies partial updates. It provides clear context but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool references. Given siblings include create and delete, the usage is inferred.

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