update_customer_address

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key partial update behavior but omits potential side effects, permission requirements, or error scenarios. Additional details like idempotency or atomicity would improve clarity.

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 concise sentences that front-load the core purpose. No redundant information; every word serves a purpose.

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?

Given the CRUD context, the description sufficiently explains the tool's behavior and parameter usage. It lacks a mention of return values or error handling, but the schema covers field descriptions. Overall, it's complete for a typical update operation.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage for all 14 parameters. The description adds value by explaining that only provided fields are modified and referencing the URL pattern, which clarifies the role of customerId and addressId as path parameters.

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 action ('Update'), the resource ('address book entry'), and specifies it's a 'partial update'. It also provides the HTTP method and URL pattern, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_customer_address or delete_customer_address.

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 explains partial update behavior ('Only explicitly provided fields are modified; omitted fields are kept'), implying when to use this tool over a full update or create. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or conditions when not to use it.

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