update_appointment

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States mutation intent ('update') but lacks behavioral details: partial vs full replacement semantics, validation rules for parameter combinations (e.g., vehicleId/customerId consistency), idempotency, error handling for invalid IDs, or return value structure.

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?

Single sentence is efficient and front-loaded, wasting no words. However, for an 8-parameter mutation tool with zero annotations and no output schema, the description is inappropriately brief—undersized for the complexity rather than optimally concise.

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 mutation tool with 8 parameters and no annotations/output schema, the description is insufficient. Lacks: explanation of partial update behavior, linking logic between orderId/vehicleId/customerId, return value documentation, and side effect disclosure.

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 has 100% description coverage, establishing baseline 3. Description adds minimal semantic context: 'reschedule' loosely implies date fields without explicitly mapping to startDate/endDate parameters. Does not explain parameter interactions or why only 'id' is required while other fields are optional.

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 specific verbs ('update', 'reschedule') and resource ('appointment'). Distinguishes from create_appointment by specifying 'existing' and from get/list tools by specifying mutation. However, does not clarify the relationship between 'update' and 'reschedule' (synonyms or distinct behaviors?) nor distinguish from sibling update tools (update_customer, update_vehicle).

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?

Implies prerequisite by stating 'existing appointment' but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this vs create_appointment, nor how to obtain the required ID (via get_appointment or list_appointments). No alternatives or prerequisites mentioned.

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