wafle_pricing_rules_update

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

Aside from the idempotentHint annotation, the description adds no behavioral detail. It doesn't disclose partial update semantics, response format, or error behavior, which are especially important for a PATCH operation with no output schema.

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 sentence with no filler, making it concise. However, it is terse to the point of missing valuable contextual information, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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?

With no output schema and minimal annotations, the description leaves out return values, error conditions, and optional field behavior. For a tool with multiple optional parameters, this is incomplete contextual coverage.

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 only 20%, with only slug described. The description fails to clarify the meaning of label, value, active, or rule_id beyond the fact that rule_id targets the rule. It doesn't compensate for the sparse schema documentation.

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 states a specific action (patch) on a specific resource (pricing rule) identified by id, clearly distinguishing it from create, delete, and list operations among siblings. The verb 'patch' implies partial update, which is accurate.

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 implies usage for updating existing pricing rules but provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. It does not mention that creation is handled by wafle_pricing_rules_create or listing by wafle_pricing_rules_list, leaving the context implicit.

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