panelica_plans_patch_v1_plans_id

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

No annotations provided. The description merely says 'Update plan' implying mutation, but does not disclose behavioral details such as error handling, partial updates, or whether it requires specific permissions.

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 concise: three lines including HTTP method and category. No wasted words, though it could be more informative.

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?

For a PATCH operation, the description does not mention what fields can be updated. The input schema only contains id, likely missing request body fields. This leaves the agent underinformed for proper usage.

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% with one parameter (id). Description adds no meaning beyond the schema, which already documents 'Path parameter: id'. Baseline 3 applies.

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 states 'Update plan', which is a clear verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get and delete plans. However, it lacks specificity about what aspects of a plan can be updated.

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 versus alternatives. The description is implicit that it updates a plan, but there are no exclusions or context for when to choose this over other tools.

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