update_product_category

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does convey that this is a partial update ('fields to change'), which is useful. However, it does not mention permissions, potential side effects, reversibility, or the response format, leaving notable gaps for a mutating operation.

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 containing exactly the necessary information: what the tool does and how to use it. There is no redundant phrasing or wasted 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 simple update tool with five well-documented parameters, the description covers purpose, mutable fields, and partial-update behavior, which is sufficient for selecting and invoking the tool. No output schema exists, but the return value is not essential to know beforehand. Missing error-handling details are a minor gap.

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 schema has 100% coverage for all five parameters. The description adds the partial-update semantics: only fields passed are changed, and it maps the 'visibility' concept to the hidden boolean parameter. This is meaningful context beyond the schema's individual field descriptions.

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 begins with a specific verb and resource—'Update a product category'—and enumerates the mutable fields: name, image, description, or visibility. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_product_category, delete_product_category, and list_categories.

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 instruction 'Pass id + fields to change' gives clear guidance on how to invoke the tool and implies it is for modifying an existing category. It does not explicitly name alternatives for create/delete operations, but the context is sufficient for an agent to know when it applies.

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