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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully reveals partial-update semantics—unspecified fields are left unchanged. It does not disclose authentication needs, return behavior, error conditions, or reversibility, which are significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 short and front-loaded, with the core action and field scope stated first. The partial-update idea is expressed twice, which is slightly redundant, but overall there is little waste.

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?

This is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, and the description leaves important context unstated: required id is only in the schema, the 'description' field discrepancy is unexplained, and no guidance distinguishes this from set_agent_company. The partial-update note helps, but an agent is not given enough to invoke it confidently.

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 the description must compensate, but it only groups fields vaguely and even references a 'description' property that does not exist in the schema. It adds the partial-update rule, yet it does not adequately explain each parameter or resolve 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?

The description clearly states the operation ('Update an agent's basic info') and lists the targeted fields: name, description, company info. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from siblings like set_agent_company, and the mention of 'description' is not backed by any schema property, creating some ambiguity.

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 provides useful invocation guidance: partial updates are fine and only the fields to change should be included. It does not, however, explain when to choose this over alternatives such as set_agent_company, nor does it give any exclusions or prerequisites.

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