update_customer

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

Annotations already signal readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the customer must already exist and that 'key' and 'description' are optional updates, but it does not explain side effects, failure behavior, or whether omitted fields are preserved. No contradiction with 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 short and front-loaded with the main action, followed by a clear bullet summarizing how to call the tool. It has no unnecessary fillers, though 'This tool will' could be tightened.

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 simple 3-parameter update with full schema coverage and annotations, the core calling details are present. However, there is no output schema and the description does not mention what the tool returns or what happens when the customer key does not exist, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds minor context by calling customerKey 'existing' and labeling key/description as optional, but this mostly repeats what the schema states.

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 names the operation ('update') and resource ('a customer in your SimpleLocalize project'). It is specific enough to distinguish from create_customer, get_customer, and delete_customer in the sibling list, though it does not explicitly call out any sibling.

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 gives a prerequisite: provide the existing 'customerKey' to identify the customer. It also notes which fields can be updated optionally. However, it does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as create_customer or delete_customer.

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