update_audit

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry burden. 'Full update' is ambiguous—it might imply a complete replacement of all metadata, but the input schema has many optional fields, suggesting partial updates. No info on side effects, auth needs, or data overwrite behavior.

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?

Single sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists categories. Concise and to the point, though it could be slightly more structured.

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 tool with 20 parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is too brief. Missing details on return value, error conditions, required permissions, and whether the update is fully replacing or merging.

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 70%, so the schema handles most parameter meaning. The description groups parameters into categories (procedure info, environments, etc.), adding some value but not deep semantics beyond the schema.

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 verb 'update' and the resource 'audit's metadata', and lists categories like procedure info, auditor info, etc. It is specific but does not differentiate from siblings like patch_audit_notes, though the 'full update' phrasing hints at scope.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The sibling list includes patch_audit_notes for partial updates, but the description does not mention this or any prerequisites.

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