update_function

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the no-redeploy behavior and legacy schedule mutation but omits details like whether updates cause downtime, permissions needed, or effect on existing scheduled runs. Disclosure is partial.

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 sentences efficiently convey purpose and crucial caveats. Front-loaded with main action, no extraneous words.

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 no output schema and 5 parameters, the description covers the main use case and potential pitfalls. Lacks only minor details like return values or error handling, which are less critical for a straightforward update tool.

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 100%, so baseline 3. The description adds value by clarifying that timeout and memory are the primary updates without redeploy, and that schedule is legacy with an alternative. This goes beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 explicitly states it updates timeout or memory without redeploying code, which is a specific action on a resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like deploy_function and other update tools by emphasizing no-code-redeploy and directing new trigger declarations to ReleaseSpec.

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 clearly indicates when to use (for timeout/memory updates) and when not to use (for new schedule/email triggers, use ReleaseSpec). This provides explicit alternatives and context.

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