twdesk-update_tag

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false (mutation) and idempotentHint=false. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as side effects, permissions, or any constraints. It provides no value beyond the annotations.

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?

At two words, the description is very concise but arguably too brief. It is front-loaded, but every word earns its place. However, it could be slightly expanded to improve clarity without losing conciseness.

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 simplicity (3 parameters, no output schema) and the presence of annotations, the description is still lacking. It does not provide any usage context, behavioral details, or guidance beyond the name. A complete description would include when to update vs create or relevant constraints.

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 100% with clear descriptions for each parameter (id, name, color). The tool description does not add extra meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Update Desk tag.' clearly states the action (update) and resource (Desk tag), but it is minimal and does not differentiate from sibling tools like twdesk-create_tag or other tag operations. It avoids tautology but lacks specificity.

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 guidelines provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool over alternatives, such as creating a new tag or other update operations. No context for usage is given.

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