smokeball_update_layout

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

The description only mentions routing and authentication scope but does not disclose behavioral traits like whether the update is partial or full replacement, required permissions, or potential side effects. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden.

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 very short (two sentences) and front-loaded with the operation name, but the second sentence about routing is boilerplate and adds little value. It could be more informative without being verbose.

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 having an output schema, the description lacks critical input guidance. For an update tool, it should specify what parameters can be modified in the layout, but it does not. The description is insufficient 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?

The single 'arguments' parameter is described as a JSON string, but its structure and allowed keys are not explained. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate.

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 is an 'update_layout' operation for the Smokeball connector, which implies modifying an existing layout. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'smokeball_create_layout' or 'smokeball_delete_layout', and the description is generic.

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 such as 'smokeball_create_layout' or 'smokeball_get_layout'. There are no usage context or exclusions mentioned.

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