Update Postgres instance

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

The description only reveals the API call (PATCH) but does not elaborate on side effects, permissions required, or whether updates cause restarts. Annotations are limited to hints, so the description should fill the gap but fails to do so.

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 very concise at two sentences and front-loaded with the key action. However, the brevity sacrifices completeness, earning a 4 rather than a 5.

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's complexity (12 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. It does not mention return values, required fields beyond postgresId, or the effect of updates. The agent is left without essential context for correct 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?

With only 33% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining key parameters. Instead, it adds no parameter-level information beyond what the schema already provides, missing an opportunity to clarify complex fields like ipAllowList or readReplicas.

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 'Update Postgres instance' and mentions the API endpoint, indicating the verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from other postgres-related tools like create or suspend beyond the action name.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as render_create_postgres or render_suspend_postgres. It lacks context about prerequisites or scenarios that call for an update.

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