bookshelf_update_downloadclient

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

The description explicitly states 'WRITE' and 'modifies your Bookshelf instance,' which clearly communicates the side effect of the operation. However, the annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds little beyond that. It does not mention whether the update is partial or full replacement, or any potential impacts on dependent data.

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 very concise and front-loads the primary action. Each sentence is short, though 'Query params: forceSave' is somewhat confusing and the capital 'WRITE' is stylistic. It is an efficient use of words but could be clearer in its parameter reference.

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 an update tool with a required id, a complex body object, and an output schema, the description lacks essential context. It does not explain what the id refers to, what the body should contain, or what the result of the update is. This is a significant gap given the tool's complexity.

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 carries the full burden for parameter meaning. It only mentions 'forceSave' (mismatching the schema's force_save property) without explaining its effect, and provides no information about the 'id' or 'body' parameters. This leaves the agent guessing about the structure and purpose of the request payload.

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 the resource 'downloadclient,' which is specific and unambiguous. It also adds 'this modifies your Bookshelf instance' to reinforce the action. It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like bulk_update_downloadclient, but the singular 'update' conveys the core purpose adequately.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create, delete, or bulk_update_downloadclient. It does not mention prerequisites, typical scenarios, or any exclusions. The brief 'WRITE' note hints at mutating behavior but does not provide usage context.

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