update_psa_customer_mappings

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive nature (destructiveHint=false). The description merely states 'Update' which aligns, but adds no additional behavioral context such as required permissions or side effects.

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?

Single sentence, concise but too minimal. Lacks crucial details. Not front-loaded with additional context beyond the explicit description.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (update with nested body, no output schema), the description is incomplete. Does not explain what mappings are, response format, error handling, or link to related tools like 'list_psa_customer_mappings'.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. However, the 'body' parameter description is vague ('PSA mappings payload') and the description does not clarify expected structure. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb 'Update' and resource 'Standard PSA mappings for a customer'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_psa_customer_mapping' and 'list_psa_customer_mappings', though not explicitly. However, it is specific enough.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites or context for usage. The description does not provide when-not-to-use or mention related tools.

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