qbo_classes_update

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

Unambiguously describes sparse-update behavior ('Only provided fields are changed') and required fields (Id, SyncToken). Lacks details on error states (e.g., stale SyncToken, record not found) but sufficient for basic understanding.

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 sentences, no fluff, front-loaded with key action ('Sparse-update') and constraints. Efficient and clear.

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 no annotations and no output schema, description covers core behavior but omits details like effect of ParentRef, return format, and error scenarios. Schema descriptions help but tool description could be more complete.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds clarifying context ('Only provided fields are changed') but has minor inconsistency: description says 'Id and SyncToken are required', but schema also requires 'Name'. Extra context balances the mismatch.

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?

Description clearly states 'Sparse-update an existing Class record' with specific verb and resource. Differentiates from sibling tools like qbo_classes_create (create) and qbo_classes_get (get).

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?

Implies use for updating an existing Class record, but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives (e.g., qbo_classes_create for new records, qbo_classes_list for listing). No when-not guidelines.

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