Update Annotation

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

Annotations already convey mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=false). The description adds no further behavioral context, such as whether partial updates are atomic, whether null clears a field, or whether the annotation must already exist.

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?

A single concise sentence that is immediately understandable with no redundant wording.

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 simple update tool with an output schema, the description is fairly minimal but not entirely inadequate. It lacks guidance on partial updates, null clearing behavior, and how to obtain annotation_key, leaving some gaps for an agent.

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 0%, and the description only paraphrases two of three parameters (comment, color) without clarifying annotation_key or null semantics. The required annotation_key parameter is left unexplained.

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 uses a specific verb ('Update') and identifies the target resource ('annotation') and the specific mutable fields ('comment and/or highlight color'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_annotation, delete_annotation, and update_note.

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 explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives beyond the verb 'update.' The intended use case is implied but not stated, and there are no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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