Api metrology dashboard widgets partial update

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds nothing beyond that — no mention of which fields can be partially updated, what the free-form body accepts, or what happens to omitted fields.

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?

It is short, but not concise in the useful sense — it is a single identifier with zero front-loaded information. There is nothing to be economical with because no content exists.

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?

A non-idempotent mutation tool with an untyped body, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage demands far more than a restated name. An agent cannot know what payload shape to send or which widget fields are patchable.

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% for both parameters, and the description supplies no information about the required `id` or the free-form `body` object. Since the body is an unconstrained additionalProperties object, the description is the only place semantics could be given, and it gives none.

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 tool name rendered as a single snake_case token, which is a tautology that restates the title verbatim. It does convey a partial update of a dashboard widget resource only because the identifier is decoded, not because the description explains anything.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus ciso_assistant_api_metrology_dashboard_widgets_update (full update) or the create/destroy siblings. No prerequisites, no exclusions, nothing.

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