Contract Testing: Update Pacticipant Version

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

The description states it updates metadata and lists the buildUrl parameter. Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. However, no additional behavioral traits (e.g., auth requirements, rate limits, side effects) are disclosed beyond what annotations provide.

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 short and to the point, with a clear purpose statement followed by a parameter list. The 'Toolset' label adds minor overhead but does not detract significantly. It is front-loaded with the core action.

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?

The tool has 3 parameters (2 required), full schema coverage, and annotations. The description covers the basic operation but does not mention what the function returns (no output schema) or if any other metadata fields exist beyond buildUrl. It is adequate but could be more informative for a mutation tool.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description repeats the same parameter descriptions without adding extra meaning (e.g., constraints, relationships). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description adds no 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 'Update metadata for a specific pacticipant version', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_pacticipant_version (which retrieves) and update_pacticipant (which updates the pacticipant itself, not its version).

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it. Siblings exist (e.g., get_pacticipant_version, update_pacticipant) but no usage comparison is provided.

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