Update GoHighLevel Appointment

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds a critical behavioral note: 'Write operation: do not run against live data without explicit approval,' which provides operational safety context beyond the structured annotations.

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 very short (two sentences), front-loading the purpose and a key warning. It is conciseness but could benefit from slight expansion to cover essential usage constraints. No waste, but borderline too terse.

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 14 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description lacks detail on return values, how to use the 'extra' field, or the workflow context with siblings (create/delete). An agent would have gaps in understanding how to properly invoke this tool.

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 only 21%, and the description does not add any parameter-level explanations. It merely states 'Update an appointment,' leaving 13 of 14 parameters undocumented in both schema and description. The description fails to compensate for low coverage.

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 it updates an appointment via PUT method. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create and delete by explicitly calling it a write operation and 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?

The description gives a safety warning about not running on live data without approval, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like create_appointment or get_calendar_events. The usage context is partially addressed.

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