share_update_profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the write safety profile is covered. The description adds concrete behavioral constraints absent from structured fields: the 16-character nickname limit, the 5 MB local-image limit, and that 'restore default avatar' is an available state change. It still omits permission/error 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?

A single, tightly written sentence that front-loads the operations and embeds the key constraints inline. Every clause earns its place with no redundancy.

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 an output schema exists (return values needn't be described), the description adequately covers the three nullable/default parameters and their limits. The remaining gap is the lack of explicit routing to share_get_profile for reading, which would make it complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must carry parameter meaning and largely does: nickname maps to the 16-char limit, avatar upload maps to avatar_path with the 5 MB/local-file constraint, and 'restore default avatar' maps to delete_avatar. It adds real meaning beyond bare parameter names, though the exact semantics of delete_avatar vs avatar_path interplay aren't spelled out.

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 a specific verb and resource (update profile) plus the exact operations: change nickname (max 16 chars), upload avatar (local image, max 5 MB), or restore the default avatar. It is unambiguous about what the tool does, though it does not explicitly name share_get_profile as the read counterpart it should not be confused with.

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?

The three operations imply when the tool is appropriate (nickname edit, avatar upload, avatar reset), but there is no explicit guidance on prerequisites, when not to use it, or that reading the current profile is share_get_profile's job. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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