update_media_file

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

The description mentions 'partial update' suggesting non-destructive behavior, but with no annotations, it fails to disclose other traits like permission requirements, idempotency, or how unspecified fields are handled. The behavioral profile is incomplete.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the core function. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool but could benefit from a second sentence clarifying scope.

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 nested 'changes' parameter and 0% schema coverage, the description is insufficiently complete. It lacks details on valid properties, constraints, and behavioral context that the agent needs to use the tool correctly.

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 0%, and the description only loosely groups 'metadata, dates, or tags' as valid change targets. It does not enumerate allowed keys or provide structure for the 'changes' object, leaving the agent to guess parameter semantics.

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 updates media metadata, dates, or tags, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like delete_media_file and upload/replacement tools, establishing a unique purpose.

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 implies usage for partial updates but provides no explicit context on when to use, prerequisites, or alternatives. Without guidance on data validation or required existence of the media file, the agent must infer usage from context.

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