Api security exceptions partial update

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

The annotations already indicate this is not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent, and open-world. The description adds no behavioral detail about partial-update semantics, required permissions, body handling, or what changes when fields are omitted.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no padding, but it is generic boilerplate rather than a useful definition. The brevity comes at the cost of essential action and parameter 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?

For a mutation endpoint with two parameters, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is far too thin. Annotations cover some safety signals, but the description does not explain partial-update behavior or parameter usage.

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%, and the description does not explain either parameter. It says nothing about the required exception `id` or the optional `body` object, leaving the agent dependent on an undocumented 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 names the resource, but the action is vague: it says exceptions can be "viewed or edited" instead of stating that this is a partial update. It does not distinguish this tool from the sibling update, create, retrieve, or list endpoints.

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 partial update instead of the full update, create, retrieve, or list siblings. The phrase "viewed or edited" could even mislead an agent into treating this as a read-capable endpoint.

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