Update Custom Format Score

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the update action and a required parameter but omits side effects, reversibility, permissions, or what happens to existing data. Without annotations, this is insufficient.

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, which is concise but lacks structure. It front-loads the action but sacrifices necessary detail, making it too terse for a complex tool with many parameters.

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 15 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is entirely inadequate. It does not explain inputs, outputs, or operational context, failing to equip the agent for proper usage.

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%, yet the description adds no explanation for any of the 15 parameters except confirming confirm must be true. The critical 'body' parameter is undefined, leaving the agent guessing.

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 uses a specific verb 'Update' and resource 'custom format score data', clearly indicating the action. It does not differentiate from sibling tool 'update_custom_format', but the resource is distinct enough for basic clarity.

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?

Only mentions the requirement confirm=true. No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_custom_format' or 'simulate_score_change', nor any context on prerequisites or typical scenarios.

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