Update Data Source

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows the update is safe and idempotent. The description adds no further behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, such as permission requirements or side effects on non-updated fields.

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 a single, concise sentence that clearly communicates the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 complexity of the input schema (nested rich text objects) and the absence of an output schema, the tool description could be more complete. It does not mention what the tool returns after an update, nor does it address potential prerequisites or error conditions. The description is adequate but leaves gaps.

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 100%, so the schema itself documents each parameter thoroughly. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or examples beyond the schema descriptions, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 updates a Notion data source, specifying the resources that can be modified: title, description, or properties. The verb 'Update' and the resource 'data source' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like create_data_source or retrieve_data_source.

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?

While the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, the context of sibling tool names (e.g., notion_create_data_source, notion_retrieve_data_source) makes it clear. The description provides enough context for an agent to infer the tool is for modifying existing data sources.

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