updatePerson

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'Update an existing person'. It fails to reveal whether updates are partial or full replacement, idempotency, error behavior, or required permissions. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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, well-structured sentence that is front-loaded and contains zero filler. It efficiently communicates the core purpose, making it appropriately concise.

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 tool with 18 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, a one-sentence description is inadequate. It does not explain return values, update semantics (e.g., merge vs replace), required fields beyond the schema, or usage examples, leaving significant gaps for effective 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?

The input schema provides descriptions for all 18 parameters, achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description itself adds no parameter details, but since the schema already documents each field, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's function: 'Update an existing person in FUB'. It specifies a concrete verb (update) and resource (person), distinguishing it from createPerson, getPerson, and other update tools for different entities.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like createPerson, bulkUpdatePeople, or other update operations. The description does not mention prerequisites (e.g., the person must already exist) or any specific context for use.

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