github_actions_update_org_variable

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits like mutation effects, required permissions, or what happens if the variable does not exist. The description is too brief to inform the agent about 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 a single sentence, highly concise and front-loaded. It effectively states the purpose, but being too brief may omit valuable information. Every sentence earns its place, but more detail would improve usefulness.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain the effect of updating, what fields are required in the body, or the behavior when the variable doesn't exist. Significant gaps for an update operation.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for its three parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It does not explain what the 'body' object should contain (e.g., value, visibility).

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 'Update an organization variable' states a specific verb and resource, but does not distinguish it from sibling tools like github_actions_create_org_variable or github_actions_delete_org_variable. The purpose is clear but lacks differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as creating, deleting, or getting the variable. No when-to-use/when-not-to-use conditions are provided.

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