update_build

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It merely states 'updates configuration' without disclosing side effects (e.g., does it restart the build?), required permissions, or whether updates are incremental or full replacement. This is insufficient 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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse. Could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, but no fluff.

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?

Despite 3 parameters and no output schema, the description provides no information about return values, error handling, or behavior on partial updates. For a mutation tool, this is underspecified.

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 provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all 3 parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, which already explains build_id, config, and tags. Baseline 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 it updates the configuration of an existing build, distinguishing it from create_build (creates new) and delete_build (removes). It uses a specific verb and resource, but could elaborate on what configuration includes.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like cancel_build or run_build. No prerequisites or exclusions mentioned, leaving the agent without context for appropriate invocation.

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