Api journeys upgrade create

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds nothing beyond structured fields: no mention of side effects on existing steps, reversibility, permissions, or what "upgrade" mutates. With a non-idempotent write operation, this is a serious disclosure gap.

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 contains no sentence, no structure, and no information beyond the identifier itself; there is nothing to front-load because nothing is stated.

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?

For a non-idempotent, open-world write tool with zero schema descriptions and no output schema, the description should explain the id, the upgrade semantics, and the expected result. None of that is present.

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?

There is one required parameter, "id", with 0% schema description coverage, and the description says nothing about it — not whether it is a journey id, a step id, a version id, or the expected format. The description fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 is the literal string "api_journeys_upgrade_create" — a restatement of the tool name with no verb, resource, or scope in prose. There is no way to tell from it what an "upgrade" of a journey actually does (migrate steps? bump a schema version? re-apply a preset?).

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?

No indication of when to use this tool, when not to, or how it relates to the many sibling journey tools (journeys_create, journeys_update, journeys_rename_create, journeys_partial_update). An agent would have to guess between upgrade, update, and rename.

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