Update custom object record

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

Annotations already indicate mutating (readOnlyHint=false), idempotent, and open-world behavior, but the description adds no behavioral detail beyond 'update'. It does not disclose whether properties are merged or fully replaced, what happens if the record does not exist, or whether unspecified properties are preserved. No contradiction with annotations.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It is concise, though slightly under-sized given the tool's four parameters and nested properties object.

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?

With three required parameters, a nested properties object, and no output schema, the description is far too minimal to support correct invocation. It omits how to obtain schemaKey, the expected shape of properties, update semantics, and any return or error behavior.

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 only 25%, with only locationId described, so the description was responsible for clarifying the other parameters. It only repeats 'properties' and does not explain that schemaKey identifies the custom object schema, recordId identifies the target record, or that properties is a map of field values.

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 ('update'), resource ('custom object record'), and scope ('properties'), which distinguishes it from get/create/delete record tools. It is clear but does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling update tools or describe how it relates to ghl_search_object_records or ghl_get_object_record.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus ghl_create_object_record or ghl_delete_object_record, and no mention of prerequisites like needing an existing schemaKey or recordId. Usage can only be implied from the verb 'update'.

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