update_inventory_tier

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing the endpoint, partial update support, specific error codes (400 ARGUMENTS_ERROR, 400 HOLD_QUANTITIES_EXCEEDS_CAPACITY_TOTAL, 403 NOT_AUTHORIZED, 404 NOT_FOUND) and their meanings, plus auth requirements. It doesn't state whether updates are reversible or what the response looks like, but the error documentation is unusually thorough.

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 error/auth block is well-organized and front-loaded with the core purpose first. However, the ENDPOINT line and error enumerations are somewhat verbose for what is a straightforward update operation, and the structured error list is closer to API reference material than agent guidance.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers auth, error handling, and update mode (partial). The main gap is lack of when-to-use guidance against siblings and no statement about return values or idempotency.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters with descriptions. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning 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?

States a specific verb (update) and resource (Inventory Tier by ID), which distinguishes it from read siblings like get_inventory_tier. However, it doesn't differentiate from update_multiple_inventory_tiers or update_capacity_tier, which have overlapping purposes.

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 update_multiple_inventory_tiers, create_inventory_tier, or update_capacity_tier. The description notes partial updates are supported but gives no context about when that's appropriate or when to prefer the batch sibling.

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