updatePersonAttachment

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Update a person attachment' without specifying whether the update is partial or full replacement, how omitted fields like fileSize are handled, or any side effects or permission requirements. This is a serious transparency 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 concise sentence with no redundant wording, earning its place by stating the tool's purpose. However, it is very brief, which slightly limits its informative value, though this is a conciseness score, not a completeness score.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain update behavior, what happens to unspecified fields, or the response format, making the tool's contract ambiguous for an agent.

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 has 100% description coverage for all five parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema—it does not clarify the relationship between parameters or update semantics.

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 the specific verb 'update' with the resource 'person attachment', making the primary action clear. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like createPersonAttachment and getPersonAttachment, though it lacks additional scope or context.

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 such as createPersonAttachment or getPersonAttachment. The description does not mention prerequisites, like whether the attachment must already exist, or any scenarios that favor this tool.

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