password_update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that it can create the field if missing, but does not explicitly state that it is a destructive write operation, nor does it mention permissions, idempotency, or side effects. Basic transparency but lacking for a mutation tool.

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 a single, focused sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficiently communicates the core functionality and edge case (field creation).

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 the lack of output schema and annotations, the description is somewhat thin. It does not explain the response format, security considerations (e.g., not exposing old password), or behavior after success. However, for a simple update tool, it covers the essential purpose adequately.

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 schema provides full parameter descriptions (100% coverage), so the description adds no extra semantic value. It does not elaborate on parameter usage beyond what is in the schema, resulting in a baseline score.

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 the tool updates/rotates a password or concealed field on an existing 1Password item, and specifies behavior when the field doesn't exist. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like password_create (creates new item) and password_read (reads).

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 for updating existing items but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like password_create or item_update. No when-not-to-use or context-specific advice is given.

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