update_document

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It does not mention whether updates are partial or full, required permissions, reversibility, or the nature of the operation (e.g., overwrite only provided fields). This is a significant gap.

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 extremely concise (4 words) but sacrifices content. While brevity is valued, it omits critical information needed for correct use, making it under-specified rather than efficiently concise.

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 output schema exists (but is not described), the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., updated document object or status). Additionally, the lack of behavioral context and parameter details makes the description incomplete for reliable invocation.

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 0%, meaning parameters have no textual description. The description 'metadata' is too vague to clarify the role of each parameter, especially 'fields_json' which likely needs format specification. The description does not compensate for the missing schema details.

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 verb 'Update' and resource 'a document's metadata' making the basic purpose obvious. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'update_folder' or 'update_task' which also update metadata, but the name itself is sufficiently descriptive.

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 'copy_documents' or 'move_documents'. There is no mention of prerequisites, contexts, or exclusions.

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