mid_registrar_update

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

The word 'Force' implies non-standard behavior, but no details are given about side effects, restrictions, or whether the update is destructive. With no annotations, the description fails to disclose important behavioral traits.

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 sentence, very concise with no redundant information. However, it may be overly terse, lacking necessary context. Still, it is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 output schema exists, return info is not needed. But for a 'force update' operation, more details are required (e.g., behavior if AOR missing, whether it creates or only updates). The description is too minimal for the task complexity.

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 only parameter 'aor' is briefly mentioned as 'for an AOR' but lacks format specifics (e.g., SIP URI vs username). Schema coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaningful details beyond the parameter name.

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 action ('Force a mid-registrar record update') and identifies the target resource (mid-registrar record for an AOR). It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like mid_registrar_dump.

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. The description does not mention context, prerequisites, or when not to use it. A single sentence with no usage hints.

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