azure_update_board

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 merely states the action (update settings) without detailing effects, permission requirements, idempotency, or failure modes. 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 extremely brief, but brevity here results in under-specification rather than efficient structure. It is a single phrase that omits crucial operational details, making it more like a placeholder than a concise, information-dense description.

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's complexity (nested settings object, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It does not address return values, side effects, or any success/failure indicators, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use the tool confidently.

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 50%, and the tool description adds no parameter-level detail. The 'settings' parameter is a nested object, yet the description gives no insight into what settings are expected or how they map to board configuration. The description fails to compensate for the schema gaps.

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 'Atualizar configurações de board' clearly communicates an update action on board settings, using a specific verb and resource. While it distinguishes itself from siblings like azure_list_boards or azure_get_board_config by implying a write operation, it does not explicitly differentiate from other update tools in the family.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclude any scenarios, leaving the agent without context for tool selection.

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