github_actions_update_repo_variable

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'Update' without any behavioral context. It does not disclose what happens if the variable doesn't exist, required permissions, or whether the update is partial or full replacement.

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 with no wasted words. It is concise and front-loaded.

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 updating a repository variable (e.g., possible fields in the body, permissions, error handling), the description is too minimal. No output schema or annotations exist to supplement, and sibling tools are numerous but not referenced for guidance.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions, but they are minimal. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. The 'body' parameter is described as 'Request body (JSON object)' without details on expected fields (e.g., value, visibility), so the agent lacks clarity on what to include.

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 action 'Update' and the resource 'repository variable'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create, delete, get, and list, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 versus alternatives (e.g., create_repo_variable or get_repo_variable). Lacks context on prerequisites, such as needing the variable name or the expected format of the body.

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