updateAppointmentType

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It only states 'update' (a mutation) but does not mention side effects, required permissions, reversibility, or return values. The behavior is as opaque as the tool's name, providing no added transparency.

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, compact sentence with no filler words. It is appropriately front-loaded, but it may be too minimal given the lack of other context. Still, it is efficient and easily parsed.

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 simple update tool with two fully described parameters, the description is adequate but not rich. It does not explain what happens on update (e.g., return value, partial vs full update), and no output schema exists. The lack of behavioral context reduces completeness, but the tool's simplicity keeps it at a minimum-viable level.

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% for both parameters (id and name), so the schema already documents them. The description adds no additional meaning or context about how these parameters are used, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 verb 'update' and the resource 'appointment type', making it easy for an agent to know what the tool does. It distinguishes from sibling tools like createAppointmentType and getAppointmentType, though it doesn't specify which attributes are updatable (left to the schema).

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 alternatives. The description only says 'Update an appointment type' with no mention of prerequisites, alternative tools, or contextual scenarios. With many sibling update tools, this leaves the agent to infer usage from the name.

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