voice_ai_update_action

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (mutation), destructiveHint=false (not destructive), and idempotentHint=true (idempotent). The description adds no behavioral context beyond these hints, such as what fields are updated, whether it is a full replacement or partial update, or any side effects. Since annotations exist, the bar is lower, but the description still fails to add any meaningful behavioral detail.

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?

While the description is extremely short (four words), this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It lacks any structure or front-loaded information that would help an agent understand the tool. It does not earn its place beyond echoing the name.

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 tool with a complex input schema and missing output schema, the description is inadequate. It does not explain the overall purpose, the effect of updating an action, or any contextual information about when this operation is needed. An agent would need to rely entirely on the parameter descriptions, which do not provide the high-level purpose.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all six parameters, with detailed descriptions for each property including nested object fields. The tool description adds no parameter-specific information, but because the schema already provides comprehensive semantics, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Update Agent Action' is essentially a restatement of the tool name 'voice_ai_update_action'. It does not add specificity about what updating an action entails or what distinguishes it from other action-related tools like create or delete. It provides minimal value beyond the name itself.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where an update is appropriate, whether it should be used for partial modifications, or any prerequisites. The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.

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