customers.update

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

No annotations provided, yet the description fails to disclose mutation specifics: whether updates are partial (PATCH-like) or full replacement, whether changes are reversible, or required permissions. Carries full burden but provides minimal behavioral context.

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?

Extremely brief (4 words) and front-loaded with the action. However, brevity crosses into under-specification given the complexity (4 parameters including nested objects, 0% schema coverage). No verbosity, but insufficient density.

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?

Inadequate for a mutation tool with nested objects and zero schema documentation. No output schema is present, yet description doesn't hint at return values or success/failure indicators. Missing critical context for safe invocation.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It fails to explain the 'id' parameter (customer ID vs other), the purpose of 'metadata' nested object, or constraints on name fields. Only contextualizes that parameters relate to customer updates.

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?

States the verb (Update) and resource (Ryft customer), but lacks scope clarification (partial vs full update) and does not differentiate from sibling tools like customers.create or customers.delete beyond the action word.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus customers.create, prerequisites for use (e.g., customer must exist), or error conditions. No alternative workflows mentioned.

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