Update business card

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the operation is a full replace (PUT) and that omitted fields are cleared, which is critical for a mutation tool. However, it does not mention auth requirements, rate limits, or other side effects. It adds value beyond the schema but could be more comprehensive.

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?

Two concise sentences with no waste. The description is front-loaded with purpose and the critical behavior of full replacement. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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?

With 14 parameters, 3 required, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is not fully complete. It covers the main idea and essential behavior (fetch-and-replace pattern) but does not explain all parameters or return values. It is adequate for a simple tool but could be more detailed.

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 coverage is low at 29%. The description mentions email addresses, phone numbers, and addresses, but does not explain many other parameters like RoleOrTitle, SkypeLink, or the enums for EntityType. It does not compensate sufficiently for the lack of schema documentation on individual parameters.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Update a business card (full replace via PUT)'. It specifies the exact fields that can be changed (email addresses, phone numbers, addresses) and the entity types it applies to (contact, organization, client group). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_business_card or create_contact.

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 a clear usage pattern: 'Fetch the card first with get_business_card and send back the complete card with your changes, since omitted fields are cleared.' This tells the agent how to use the tool correctly and implies that updates are a read-modify-write operation. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the guideline is strong.

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