update_headline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the primary action (update) and a constraint (max 220 chars), but lacks details on side effects, authentication requirements beyond 'authenticated user', or error behavior. Adequate but basic.

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?

Single, clear sentence with no superfluous words. The critical information (action, target, constraint) is front-loaded.

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 low complexity (1 required parameter, no nested objects, no output schema), the description is functional. It tells the agent what the tool does. Could optionally mention return value or typical success/error signals, but the omission is not critical for such a simple mutation.

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 100% (the parameter 'headline' is described with maxLength and a brief description). The tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond stating 'max 220 characters', which is already in the schema. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Update') and explicitly names the resource ('authenticated user's LinkedIn headline') with a clear constraint (max 220 characters). It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_experience, get_skills, and update_about.

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 implies usage (update headline) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tool names offer context, but the description itself does not mention when-not-to-use or prerequisites.

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