update_node

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It details the merge behavior (merge vs replace), describes return type, and provides examples. This is comprehensive behavioral disclosure beyond minimal requirements.

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?

Description is well-structured: main statement, usage guidelines in bullet style, parameter descriptions, and examples. Every sentence adds value and there is no redundancy. Highly concise for the amount of 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 tool has 3 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema exists, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, parameters, behavioral details, return type, and examples. No gaps identified.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the tool description fully describes all three parameters (node_id, properties, merge) with types and behavior. Adds significant meaning not present in the schema, such as merge default and properties allowed value types.

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 tool's purpose: 'Update properties on an existing node.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings by explicitly listing what not to use it for (changing labels, creating, deleting nodes) with sibling tool names.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('when you need to modify a node's properties after creation') and when not to use ('Do NOT use for: changing labels (use execute_gql), creating new nodes (use create_node), or deleting nodes (use delete_node)'). Provides clear context and alternatives.

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