update_mod

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It adds useful behavioral context by stating 'Only the fields you provide will be changed' and enumerating the allowed status values. However, it does not disclose permissions, side effects, error handling, or behavior for invalid mod_id.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a clear parameter list. No redundant or filler content.

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 simple update tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior (partial update, parameter meanings, status enum). It lacks some edge-case context but is complete enough given the tool's complexity.

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 adds meaningful context beyond the schema: 'mod_id' is defined as the ID of the mod, 'name' as new name, 'link' as URL, and 'status' with explicit allowed values. This goes far beyond the schema's bare property names.

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 printer mod', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_mod and update_printer by explicitly targeting mods.

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 usage (when you need to update a mod) and notes 'Only the fields you provide will be changed', but it does not explicitly compare against alternatives or list exclusions. There is no mention of when not to use this tool.

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