update_tileset

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full burden. 'Partial update' hints at non-destructive behavior but does not disclose whether old fields are retained, if permissions are required, or if the operation is reversible. No mention of return values, errors, or side effects.

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 one sentence, which is efficient but lacks supporting details. It is front-loaded with the core purpose but omits necessary behavioral or contextual information.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description should offer more: explanation of tileset concept, what fields are updatable, confirmation of update, and distinction from other update tools. It feels incomplete for a mutation tool.

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?

Both parameters are described in the schema with 100% coverage. The description adds the 'partial update' context, which clarifies that fields are incrementally updated. However, it does not specify allowed keys or structure for the nested 'fields' object.

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 states 'Update a tileset (partial update).' It uses a specific verb and resource, and adds 'partial update' to clarify incremental behavior. However, it does not differentiate this tool from numerous sibling update_* tools (e.g., update_actor, update_class), leaving ambiguity.

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 on when to use this tool vs. alternatives such as get_tileset or create_tileset (which does not exist among siblings). No prerequisites, context, or exclusions are mentioned.

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