Patch Managed Object

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

Annotations destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true are consistent with the description's 'Update' nature. The description does not add behavioral context beyond annotations, such as concurrency handling or authentication needs. It does not contradict annotations.

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?

Description is a single, focused sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded and wastes no space.

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 patch tool with no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could mention return value or revision handling, but the schema provides sufficient detail on required fields. Slightly incomplete for a tool with no output schema.

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?

All 4 parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage). The description reinforces the use of JSON Patch operations but does not add new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the tool updates specific fields of a managed object using JSON Patch operations. It uses a specific verb (Update) and resource (managed object), and the method (JSON Patch) distinguishes it from siblings like createManagedObject or deleteManagedObject.

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 modifying fields but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like patchManagedObjectDefinition or patchManagedObjectRelationship. No guidance on when not to use or prerequisites is provided. The input schema references listManagedObjects and getManagedObjectSchema, offering indirect context.

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