sf_update_product

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

The description adds context beyond the destructiveHint annotation by stating 'Only specified fields change' and giving examples of common operations. It reinforces the destructive nature and provides insight into partial update semantics, though it omits details on 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?

The description is somewhat redundant, repeating the update purpose in two paragraphs and including extraneous tags like [INSTRUCTIONS] and [DESTRUCTIVE]. While informative, it could be more concise by merging the two parts and removing redundant elements.

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 tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the purpose, common use cases, and partial update behavior. It does not cover error conditions or required permissions, but these are 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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents parameters. The description adds value by providing real-world examples (e.g., set IsActive to false to discontinue, change Family to reclassify) and emphasizing partial updates, which deepens understanding beyond the schema.

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 it patches a Product2 sObject and lists common operations like setting IsActive to false or changing Family. It distinguishes from sibling tools like sf_search_products by emphasizing the update action, though it could explicitly differentiate from other update tools.

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 when updating product fields but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives. Sibling tools suggest context, but no direct guidance is given for choosing this tool over others.

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