Update Document Type

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

Annotations already cover read-only (false), idempotent (true), and destructive (false) hints. The description adds the notion of 'selected fields', implying only provided fields are updated, which aligns with the annotations. However, it does not elaborate on other behavioral aspects like authentication requirements or error handling.

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 a single sentence with no fluff, front-loading the core action. It is appropriately brief, though it omits essential details that would make it more helpful. No wasted words.

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 tool with a nested patch object and no parameter descriptions, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the semantics of patch fields, how they interact, or any prerequisites. The presence of an output schema helps with return values, but parameter usage and behavioral nuances are missing.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate but provides no parameter information at all. It does not explain what document_type_id refers to or what the patch fields (name, match, is_insensitive, matching_algorithm) mean, leaving the agent to guess from names.

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 verb 'patch' and the resource 'document type', which conveys a partial update operation. It distinguishes from create/delete siblings but does not explicitly differentiate from bulk_edit_document_types, though the title and singular target imply single-resource update.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create, delete, or bulk edit. There are no conditions, exclusions, or context cues to help an agent decide when this is the appropriate choice.

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