Update business

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds valuable non-obvious behavior: partial updates ('Only provided fields change'), which is beyond what annotations convey. It does not disclose other traits like return format, but given the annotations, this is reasonably transparent.

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?

Two short sentences, minimal waste, and the primary action is front-loaded. The description achieves efficiency without sacrificing essential purpose clarity.

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 10 parameters, no output schema, and no nested structures, the description is extremely sparse. It lacks any mention of the required businessId, return value, error handling, or prerequisites, leaving many operational details unaddressed.

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%, so the description should compensate but doesn't. It only clarifies that the update is partial, which is useful, but provides no meaning for individual parameters beyond their field names. This is a significant gap for a 10-parameter tool.

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 a business record') with a specific resource. It distinguishes from sibling operations like create, delete, and get, and the phrase 'Only provided fields change' adds a precise behavioral scope that differentiates it further.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create or get. The usage is implied by the 'update' verb, but there is no mention of conditions, prerequisites, or when not to use it.

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