Update Experiment

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the prerequisite of resolving the id and that only id is required, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like error handling or return format.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. It is concise, though the second sentence repeating enums is somewhat redundant. Still, it 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?

Given 9 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description covers the essential action and id resolution. However, it lacks details on return values and error scenarios, leaving some gaps.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description lists enum values (already in schema) but adds no new meaning beyond the schema's property descriptions.

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 'Update a PM experiment — advance its state and record the outcome — and return it.' It uses a specific verb (update, advance, record) and resource (PM experiment), distinguishing it from create or list operations.

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 guidance to 'Resolve the id via list_experiments; only id is required,' which is useful, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_experiment) or offer exclusions.

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