update-search

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits but only says 'update'. It does not specify whether the update is partial (only provided fields) or full replacement, nor does it mention side effects, error handling, or idempotency. For a mutation tool with 41 optional parameters, this is a significant transparency gap.

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 concise sentence that captures the core purpose without redundant wording. It is front-loaded with the primary action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 the tool's complexity (41 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is far too minimal. It does not explain update semantics, return values, or error conditions. While sibling tool names provide some context, the description alone is insufficient for an agent to safely and correctly invoke this 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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds high-level categorization (criteria, filters, webhook configuration) which helps users mentally organize the many parameters, but it does not deepen understanding of individual parameters beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'existing saved search', making it distinct from sibling tools like create-search and delete-search. The scope 'with new criteria, filters, or webhook configuration' adds specificity without ambiguity.

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 phrase 'existing saved search' implies this tool is for modifying already-created searches, which differentiates it from create-search. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools, leaving some room for interpretation.

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