update_application

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It conveys that the update is partial, which is a key behavioral trait, but lacks details on idempotency, side effects, or authentication requirements. The description adds some value but is not comprehensive.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the core purpose immediately. There is no extraneous information, and every word is meaningful.

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 6 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain the behavior of partial update in detail, nor does it cover the semantics of each parameter. The description is insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly without additional schema inspection.

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 only 17% (only 'id' is described). The description does not add any additional semantics for the other parameters (name, description, etc.), leaving the agent with limited understanding of their meaning or constraints. It fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 'Logto application', and specifies the method 'by ID (partial update)'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling CRUD tools like create_application and delete_application.

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 implies that this tool is for partial updates, but it does not explicitly state when to choose it over other update approaches or provide context on prerequisites. The sibling tools help infer its use case, but the description itself offers no direct guidance on when to use or not use it.

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