Apply Patch

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

With no annotations provided, the description adds some transparency by stating required boolean values, implying mutation behavior with explicit confirmation. However, it does not detail side effects, error conditions, or reversibility.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately short, though it could benefit from additional context without losing conciseness.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description lacks crucial context such as return values, prerequisites, error handling, and the scope of the patch operation.

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%, but the description adds meaning for 'confirm' and 'dryRun' by stating their required values. It does not explain the 'operations' parameter beyond what the schema defines.

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 action 'Apply patch operations', which is a verb+resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like 'dry_run_patch' and 'validate_patch', but does not explicitly differentiate itself.

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 specifies required parameter values ('confirm true and dryRun false'), which guides usage, but lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like dry_run_patch.

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