qbo_journal_entries_update

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. It discloses sparse-update behavior and requirement of SyncToken. However, it does not explain error handling (e.g., wrong SyncToken) or whether other fields are preserved. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 efficient sentences front-loaded with the key action and constraints. No redundant information.

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?

No output schema, so return format is unknown. Description omits explanation of response (e.g., updated object). Despite schema covering parameters, the complexity of nested Line object and required debits=credits balance is noted in schema but not in description. Good enough but 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%, so description adds minimal value beyond summarizing sparse-update and required fields. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already details each parameter.

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 'Sparse-update an existing JournalEntry record,' specifying the action and resource. It also notes that only provided fields are changed and lists required fields (Id, SyncToken), distinguishing it from create/get/list/search siblings.

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 usage for updating existing records via 'only provided fields are changed' and 'Id and SyncToken are required.' It mentions fetching SyncToken first, but does not explicitly exclude use for creation or compare with other update tools.

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