update_saved_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. The term 'Patch' suggests a non-destructive partial update, but the description does not disclose idempotency, what happens to unspecified fields, or whether the tool returns the updated object. It adds some value by naming the updatable fields but lacks deeper behavioral context.

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 sentence of eight words, highly concise, and front-loaded with the verb 'Patch'. Every word is purposeful and earns its place.

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?

With 3 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not clarify that 'saved_search_id' is required, what happens if neither optional field is provided, or what the response contains (even though an output schema exists). For a mutation tool, more context is needed for completeness.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It lists the two mutable parameters ('name' and 'query string'), adding meaning beyond the schema property names. However, it does not explain the 'saved_search_id' parameter or the format of 'query_string', leaving gaps. The description provides moderate added value.

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 uses a specific verb ('Patch') and resource ('saved search') and identifies the exact fields that can be updated ('name or query string'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_saved_search, delete_saved_search, list_saved_searches, and reorder_saved_searches.

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 via the action 'Patch a saved search's name or query string' but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., creating a new saved search) or conditions like required existence of the search. The context is implied but not stated.

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