websex_http_session_update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It never states whether this is a partial merge or a full replacement of prior settings, what happens to fields omitted from the call, whether the referenced session must exist, or any permission/engagement requirement. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage this is a significant gap.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence enumerating the updatable facets with no filler. Efficient and easy to scan, though it could have spent a clause on update semantics.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. But with 9 parameters, 2 required, and no annotations, the description leaves the update/replace semantics, required-parameter meaning, and the omitted include_subdomains facet unaddressed, making it only minimally 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It names most of the mutable fields (scope, headers, cookies, rules, TLS verification, redirects), mapping roughly to scope_hosts, default_headers, cookies, rules, verify_tls, and follow_redirects. However, it omits include_subdomains and says nothing about the required engagement_id/session_id or the expected value formats.

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 a clear verb (Update) and resource (HTTP workbench session) and enumerates the mutable facets (scope, headers, cookies, rules, TLS, redirects). It distinguishes itself functionally from session_create/session_get by listing what can be changed, though it does not name sibling tools explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as websex_http_session_create, websex_http_session_get, or websex_http_session_list. An agent must infer that this is the mutation counterpart to the other session tools purely from the name.

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