Update sources

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

Annotations already provide openWorldHint and idempotentHint. The description adds only the batch behavior, which is useful but does not disclose effects like what data is updated or error conditions. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 with no redundant words. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the action and scope.

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?

The description is extremely sparse, with no mention of what 'sources' are, what the request payload should contain, or what the response looks like. Given the absence of an output schema and the vague parameter schema, the description is inadequate for an agent to invoke the tool confidently.

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 0% description coverage for the single 'sources' parameter, and the description does not explain the structure or fields of the array items. This leaves the parameter semantics completely undocumented.

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 uses a specific verb 'Update' with resource 'sources' and scope 'in batch', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like kommo_sources_update_one. It states exactly what the tool does.

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 phrase 'in batch' implies use when updating multiple sources at once, but it does not explicitly mention when to use an alternative (e.g., kommo_sources_update_one) or provide exclusions. The usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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