web_set_article_number

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It reveals the exact success response, the non-transactional nature of the operation, and importantly that the new value is not confirmed in the response—an easily missed behavior.

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 two focused sentences: the first states the purpose and scope, the second provides response behavior and verification guidance. No filler or redundant restating of the tool name.

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 two-parameter setter, this is complete: it explains what happens, what the response is, what is not confirmed, and how to verify. Authentication and error details are not essential for the agent to use the tool correctly.

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%, but the description and parameter names together convey the mapping: material_number identifies the article, and own_article_number is the customer-specific label. It could add format or constraint details, but it gives enough meaning for correct invocation.

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 verb and resource: setting a customer-specific article number for an article in the webshop. It also distinguishes the operation from an order or booking, making its purpose unmistakable even among siblings.

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?

It explicitly says this is only labeling in the customer account and not an order/booking, which is a clear when-not. It also recommends verifying with web_get_article because the webshop does not confirm the value, naming a concrete alternative workflow.

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