Update Reminder

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds a key constraint that certain fields are immutable, which is not visible from other metadata. It does not detail side effects or error handling, but the immutability note is valuable.

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 concise and well-structured. It opens with the main action and immediately follows with the critical limitation, all in two sentences with no redundant 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's simplicity (5 straightforward parameters, no output schema), the description covers the essential behavior and constraints. It could mention response format or error conditions, but the combination of schema descriptions and the added immutability note makes it reasonably 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?

The input schema already provides 100% description coverage for all parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds semantic context by clarifying that only the description and notification/active flags are changeable, which helps the agent understand which parameters are actually effective. This goes beyond the schema.

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 function: updating a reminder's description and flags. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools by noting the immutable fields (employee, admin user, date), making its purpose specific and 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?

The description provides clear context on what can be updated and explicitly warns about what cannot be changed via the API, giving practical usage guidance. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives, though the scope makes it obvious.

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