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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds valuable context that some updates change live behavior at once and that the reply signals such events, which goes beyond the annotations.

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 with zero fluff. The create/update distinction and entity list are front-loaded, and the behavioral caution is placed at the end. Every sentence 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?

For a write tool with no output schema, the description covers operation semantics, entity scope, field lookup, and a behavioral caveat about live changes. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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% and each property has a meaningful description (entity lists allowed values, data explains to call describeQueryableFields, id explains create/update distinction). The description adds no new parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 states a clear verb (create/update), a specific resource (one row of a writable entity), and enumerates the entity list. It distinguishes itself from siblings like delete, query, and publishEquation by focusing on the create/update write operation.

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?

It gives explicit guidance on when to create vs update (presence of id) and points to describeQueryableFields for field rules. It does not name alternative tools or exclusion criteria, but the operation is self-explanatory and the reference to describeQueryableFields serves as a helper.

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