sap_update_reputation_metrics

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states that metrics are self-reported and updates apply to the connected wallet SAP agent. It does not mention overwrite behavior, side effects, authentication requirements, or what happens after invocation. This minimal disclosure is insufficient.

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 12-word sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it lacks structure and could be improved by adding brief contextual details without becoming verbose.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not indicate what the tool returns upon successful update. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap. Even with only two simple parameters, the description is incomplete as it omits the response behavior.

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 coverage is 100% (both parameters have descriptions in the schema). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate. It does not provide ranges, validations, or context on how the parameters affect the update.

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 updates self-reported latency and uptime metrics for the connected wallet SAP agent. It uses a specific verb ('Update') and identifies the resource (latency and uptime metrics), distinguishing it from read-only tools like sap_get_agent_stats. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other update tools (e.g., sap_update_agent).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. Among numerous sibling tools, there is no context on appropriate invocation circumstances.

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