send-put-request

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

Annotations declare idempotentHint=true, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond what the annotations already provide. No mention of effects on server state, auth needs, or error conditions.

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?

While extremely concise, the description is under-specified rather than efficiently informative. It lacks structure, providing only a single sentence that adds no value beyond the name.

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 tool has 6 parameters, no output schema, and zero parameter descriptions, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to equip the agent for correct invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and no parameter details in the description, the agent receives no information about what 'url', 'data', 'headers', etc., mean or how to use them. This is a critical gap.

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 'send the put request' is a tautology of the tool name and does not specify what resource or endpoint is affected. It barely distinguishes from sibling tools (send-post-request, etc.) by only mentioning the HTTP method.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus its siblings (POST, GET, DELETE). The description lacks context about idempotency or prerequisites, leaving the agent without decision criteria.

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