patch_matter

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It correctly indicates a partial update via PATCH, but does not mention potential side effects, permissions, or idempotency. The description is honest but minimal.

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 two sentences long with no fluff. It efficiently conveys purpose, usage, and alternatives.

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 3 parameters, no annotations, but an output schema exists, the description is partially complete. It differentiates from a sibling and states the scope, but lacks details on partial update behavior, error handling, and parameter constraints.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'status or stage', which loosely maps to the 'status' and 'stage_id' parameters, but 'matter_id' is not described. The description adds limited semantic value beyond the schema.

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 tool's function: partially updating a matter's status or stage using PATCH. It also distinguishes from the sibling tool 'update_matter', which is for name/description changes.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (for partial updates of status/stage) and when to use the alternative 'update_matter' (for name/description). This provides clear usage guidance.

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