clio_update_custom_action

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as destructive nature, idempotency, required permissions, or side effects. The name implies mutation, but details are lacking.

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 short and front-loaded with the tool name. It avoids fluff but repeats 'connector operation' and 'platform tool' redundantly. Still, it is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter tool.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description does not mention return values or behavior on update (e.g., error handling, required fields). It fails to provide a complete picture of what the tool does beyond its basic function.

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 description adds that 'arguments' is a JSON string for the connector operation, which clarifies its type and purpose beyond the schema's default string type. However, with 0% schema coverage, it does not describe expected keys or format, leaving significant ambiguity.

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 it updates a custom action via the Clio connector, and the name clearly distinguishes it from siblings like create, get, list, delete. However, it does not explain what a 'custom action' is or which attributes 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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like clio_create_custom_action or clio_list_custom_actions. The description only repeats the tool name and routing.

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