update_dock

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. 'Update' indicates mutation, but there is no information about side effects, required permissions, whether it's a partial or full update, or what happens on failure. This is insufficient for a mutation tool with many parameters.

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?

While extremely concise at three words, the description is undersized for a tool with 10 parameters. It lacks any structural elements like bullet points or sentences that would help an agent quickly understand scope, making it less effective than a slightly longer but more informative 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 complexity (10 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is grossly incomplete. It does not explain the update semantics, expected response, error conditions, or any prerequisites. An agent has insufficient information to use this tool correctly.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameter meanings. The description adds no additional context or usage hints beyond what the schema provides, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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 ('Update') and resource ('dock'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_dock, delete_dock, and get_dock. However, it is too brief and does not specify what aspects of the dock can be updated, though the schema provides that detail.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_dock or sort_docks. There are no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned, leaving the agent to infer context from the name alone.

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