update_product_rate_plan_status

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden. It does not disclose important behavioral traits such as state transition rules, idempotency, side effects on subscriptions, or return behavior. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise with three short sentences, front-loading the main action. No unnecessary words or redundancy, earning its place efficiently.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 params, no output schema), the description lacks essential context such as allowed state transitions, prerequisites, and effects on associated entities. It is incomplete for safe invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the HTTP endpoint and lists valid status values, but these are largely redundant with the schema. It provides minimal additional meaning 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 clearly states 'Update a rate plan status' with a specific verb and resource, and includes the HTTP method and endpoint. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_product_rate_plan or update_product_status.

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 provides valid status values and mentions the required parameter, but does not give explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update_product_rate_plan) or any prerequisites. Usage is implied but not explicitly differentiated.

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