hosts_update

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is partly covered. However, for a mutation tool the description adds nothing beyond the name: no mention of whether updates are partial or full replacement, required permissions, or side effects on linked nodes/inbounds.

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?

Three words are technically short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. Nothing is front-loaded because nothing is provided.

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 32-parameter mutation tool with nested objects, no output schema, and near-zero schema description coverage demands substantial description content that is entirely absent. The definition is inadequate for the tool's complexity.

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 3% across 32 parameters, many of them nested objects (mapper, inbound, internalSquads). The description compensates with zero parameter information, leaving the vast majority of inputs undocumented.

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?

States a verb and resource ('Update a host'), which is minimally clear, but gives no indication of scope, what fields are updatable, or how it differs from hosts_bulk_update or hosts_create beyond the name. It is barely above a tautology of the tool 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?

No guidance on when to use this versus hosts_bulk_update, hosts_clone, or hosts_get. No prerequisites or preconditions mentioned. An agent must infer usage entirely from the name and siblings.

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