conduyt_bulk_update_deals

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden alone. It usefully discloses that this is a per-row bulk mutation requiring deals:edit and that each row must carry its own id and fields, but it does not explain partial-failure behavior, validation rules, atomicity, or what the response contains.

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?

Two sentences with no waste. The core distinction and permission requirement are front-loaded, and the alternative is mentioned only where it helps route the agent correctly.

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 bulk mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential model (per-row id plus fields), the permission requirement, and the sibling alternative. However, it leaves important operational context unstated, such as how failures are handled when only some rows succeed and whether updates are transactional.

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%, and the schema already documents that updates is an array of per-deal objects requiring id plus fields, including an example. The description reinforces the same meaning by emphasizing different changes per row, but adds little parameter-specific detail beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: applying DIFFERENT field changes per deal in one call, with each row carrying its own id plus fields. It directly contrasts with conduyt_bulk_edit_deals for the same change across many, so an agent can distinguish the two tools without opening either schema.

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?

It explicitly names the alternative (conduyt_bulk_edit_deals) and the condition that selects it: when the same change applies across many deals. It also states the required permission deals:edit, giving a clear precondition for invocation.

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