put_contact_id

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It adds error codes ('noent', 'exists', 'no_match'), which give insight into potential failure modes. However, it does not disclose update semantics (e.g., merge vs replace), idempotency, side effects, or required permissions. The error codes are helpful but not comprehensive.

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 extremely concise: one sentence for the action and one line for error codes. It is front-loaded and every part is necessary. No wasted words, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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's complexity (13 parameters, nested objects in schema), the description is sparse. It does not explain update behavior (e.g., whether missing fields are zeroed out) or how to use nested sub-objects. The presence of an output schema partially compensates, but more context would be beneficial for a complete understanding.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it only mentions 'with the given id' referring to the path parameter. No additional semantics for other parameters are provided.

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 'Updates the ContactEntry with the given id', using a specific verb and resource. It identifies the resource by path parameter, distinguishing it from sibling tools like post_contact (create) and delete_contact_id (delete). However, it could be more precise about which fields are updatable, though the schema provides full parameter descriptions.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. It simply states it updates a contact, without mentioning cases where get or post should be used instead.

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