qbo_refund_receipts_update

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only states 'sparse-update' and required fields, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, idempotency, or return values. Minimal transparency.

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 one concise sentence with two clauses, front-loaded with the core action and essential constraints. Every word earns its place.

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 10 parameters, 5 required, nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too terse. It lacks guidance on the return value, error handling, and the prerequisite fetch for SyncToken (only mentioned in schema). Incomplete for a complex update tool.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds that only provided fields change and that Id/SyncToken are required, but does not elaborate on parameter behavior beyond the schema.

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 ('sparse-update'), the resource ('existing RefundReceipt record'), and key requirements ('Id and SyncToken are required'). It distinguishes from create and other operations by specifying sparse behavior.

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 when to use (sparse updates) but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like create or full update. No exclusions or context about sibling tools.

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