Update catalog elements

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

Annotations contribute openWorldHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond that. It does not disclose whether updates are partial or full replacements, how invalid element IDs are handled, or what the response looks like—critical gaps for an update operation.

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, focused sentence that leads with the verb, making it concise and front-loaded. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices useful detail, though for conciseness alone it is excellent.

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?

As a bulk update tool with no output schema and minimal annotations, the description should explain update semantics, response behavior, and error handling. It provides none of these, leaving the agent under-informed about how to correctly invoke and interpret the tool.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the parameters. It implies the 'elements' array holds multiple elements but does not clarify its structure or the role of 'catalog_id'. Since the description fails to compensate for the missing schema descriptions, parameter meaning is largely undetermined.

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 ('catalog elements'), and the scope ('multiple'), which distinguishes it from the sibling tool kommo_catalog_elements_update_one that handles a single element. This is a specific and unambiguous purpose.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_one or create. The description only states what it does, not when it should be preferred, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and sibling context.

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