update-planner-bucket

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, which the description matches with 'Update.' The description adds value by disclosing the If-Match requirement and referencing the prerequisite get call. It does not contradict annotations. However, it could mention whether the update is partial or full.

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 short (two sentences plus a tip). The tip is well-placed and uses a clear visual marker. It is concise and direct. Could be slightly more structured, but it efficiently conveys critical information.

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?

With 5 parameters (3 required), nested objects, and no output schema, the description could elaborate more on the body structure (partial vs full update) and return values. However, it does cover the essential header requirement. The schema's good coverage partially compensates, but gaps remain.

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 80%, and the schema provides good descriptions for most parameters (e.g., 'ETag value', 'Path parameter: plannerBucketId'). The description adds only the tip that explains the purpose of includeHeaders. This adds minimal extra meaning 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 the properties of plannerbucket object,' specifying a verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create-planner-bucket and delete-planner-bucket. However, the term 'plannerbucket' is slightly informal and could be clearer.

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 includes a critical tip: 'Requires If-Match header with ETag from get-planner-bucket (use includeHeaders=true).' This explicitly tells when to use the tool, the prerequisite step, and how to obtain the necessary header. No guidance is missing for usage context.

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