Update App

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

The description does not disclose side effects, merge vs replace behavior, or any destructive implications beyond the annotation. Since destructiveHint is true, more transparency about partial updates or irreversibility would be expected.

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 to the point, but the inaccuracy regarding 'version' slightly detracts. It is structured as a single sentence listing a few potential fields, which is acceptable but not highly organized.

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 complexity of the schema (nested objects, multiple enums, optional vs required fields), the description is minimal. It does not explain the purpose of the scale, tracking, or autoDeploy fields, nor the behavior when optional fields are omitted.

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?

Only the requestBody parameter has a description ('The JSON request body'), while all other parameters (workspaceSlug, appSlug, env, region) lack explanations. The schema provides enums and constraints but no field-level descriptions, and the 'version' mention in the description does not map to any schema parameter.

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 an app, using the verb 'Update' and resource 'app'. However, it mentions 'version' which is not present in the schema, causing slight confusion about the actual updatable fields.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like createApp, deleteApp, or redeployApp. The description only gives a generic update statement without differentiating scenarios.

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