update_org_unit_limits

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

Annotations already indicate write (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false) behavior. The description adds detail about the partial update (PATCH) and the resource type, which is useful behavioral context beyond the structured fields.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource, and includes critical behavioral information (PATCH). No extraneous words.

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 mutation tool with annotations and a clear purpose, the description is mostly complete. It could mention return value or side effects, but the lack is not critical given the tool's simplicity.

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 input schema covers both parameters but the body parameter's description is vague ('refer to N-central API docs for field shape'), offering minimal guidance. The tool description does not add further meaning to the parameters beyond the schema, leaving uncertainty about the payload structure.

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) and the resource (licensing/usage limits for an organization unit). It also specifies the HTTP method (PATCH) and partial update behavior, distinguishing it from read-only siblings like get_org_unit_limits.

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 use for updating limits but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update_org_unit_custom_property). No exclusion criteria or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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