gerent365_update_reservation

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states only that it updates fields (date, time, status), but does not disclose whether it performs partial or full updates, what happens to omitted fields, validation rules, or required authentication. This is a significant gap 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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource. It is perfectly concise with no unnecessary words or repetition.

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 an 8-parameter update tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too thin. It does not explain that only id is required, how omitted fields are treated, possible error scenarios, or return values. The context is far from complete for an agent to invoke it reliably.

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 only 25% (only id and status have descriptions). The description adds meaning for date, time, and status but ignores name, notes, phone, and partySize, which are also undocumented in the schema. It only partially compensates for the low schema coverage.

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 uses the specific verb 'Actualiza' (updates) and clearly identifies the resource as an existing reservation by ID. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_reservation and list_reservations by stating it modifies an existing entity rather than creating or listing.

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 it is for updating existing reservations but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like obtaining the ID via list_reservations. No exclusions or alternative tools are referenced.

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