update_collection

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to specify whether the update is partial or full, whether variables are replaced or merged, or whether permissions are required. No side effects or reversibility are mentioned, leaving significant ambiguity for a mutation tool.

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, tightly worded sentence with no redundancy. Every word contributes to conveying the tool's purpose, making it highly scannable and efficient.

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?

Although the schema is well-documented, the tool has no annotations and no output schema. The description does not explain update semantics (e.g., whether variables replace the entire set), the necessity of the collectionUid parameter, or any response behavior. This leaves critical gaps for an agent to use the tool reliably.

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 schema provides 100% coverage of all three parameters, so the description does not need to repeat them. It adds no extra semantic value beyond naming the fields, which are already documented. A baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 with a specific verb ('update') and resource ('collection metadata'), listing the exact fields affected (name, description, variables). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_collection, delete_collection, and get_collection.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_workspace or update_request, nor does it mention prerequisites like requiring an existing collection. It only implies usage from the action verb, offering no contextual 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.