card-update

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

The description only indicates an update operation (mutation) but does not disclose behavioral traits like partial update behavior (PATCH vs PUT), side effects, permissions required, or error handling. No annotations are provided to complement this.

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 very concise (one sentence plus a tag) and front-loaded with the main action. However, it sacrifices useful detail that could be added without becoming verbose.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a nested object parameter, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, error states, or whether all fields are required or optional. The agent lacks cues for proper invocation.

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 description does not add meaning beyond the input schema. The schema's description for requestBody is minimal ('The JSON request body.'), and cardPublicId has no description. The text 'by its public ID' aligns with the parameter but adds no semantics for requestBody fields.

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 'Updates a card by its public ID', which is a specific verb and resource. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like card-create or card-delete. However, it does not detail which specific fields are updated, though the input schema partly covers that.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., card-byId for reading, card-create for new cards). No context provided on prerequisites, such as needing a valid cardPublicId or that the card must exist.

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