github_orgs_update_pat_access

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only says 'update' without disclosing what changes are possible, whether permissions are required, if the operation is reversible, or what the expected response is. The body parameter is a free-form object, but no constraints or examples are given.

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, front-loaded sentence of 12 words that directly states the purpose. Every word earns its place; no extraneous 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 no output schema or annotations, the description is too sparse. It lacks details on permission requirements, body format, error handling, and the distinction from the similar sibling tool. An agent would need additional info to use it correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema: 'org' and 'pat_id' are self-explanatory, but 'body' is only described as 'Request body (JSON object)' in the schema, and the description does not elaborate on allowed fields or structure.

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 'access a fine-grained personal access token has to organization resources'. It distinguishes the single token scope from the sibling 'github_orgs_update_pat_accesses' (plural) via singular/plural naming, but does not explicitly differentiate or mention the alternative.

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 'github_orgs_update_pat_accesses' for bulk updates. There is no context about required permissions, prerequisites, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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