update_presto_engine

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that engine_restart set to 'force' triggers a restart, which is helpful, but it does not disclose whether the update is reversible, whether it disrupts running queries, or if specific permissions are required. The description is partially transparent but lacks important behavioral context.

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 structured as a concise Args/Returns docstring with minimal redundancy. Each parameter is listed on a separate line, and the return value is briefly described. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, but the line breaks could be tighter for better readability.

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?

The tool has an output schema (as per context), and the description mentions that the return is a dict with updated engine configuration, which is sufficient. However, for 7 parameters, the description does not cover error conditions, prerequisites (e.g., engine must exist), or implications of property changes. It is moderately complete but has gaps.

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%, so the description must compensate. It lists all 7 parameters with brief explanations (e.g., 'engine_restart: Set to "force" to trigger restart after update'), but the explanations are mostly repetitions of parameter names (e.g., 'engine_properties: Engine configuration properties'). The description adds some value but is not sufficiently detailed for parameters like engine_properties or remove_engine_properties.

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 explicitly states 'Update Presto engine configuration in watsonx.data', which clearly identifies the verb (update), resource (Presto engine), and domain. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_prestissimo_engine and update_spark_engine by specifying 'Presto'.

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 a list of parameters but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_prestissimo_engine or update_spark_engine. It implies usage via the engine type in the name, but no direct guidance on prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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