update_records

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Update' which implies mutation, but it does not disclose that updates are permanent, that a where clause is required to avoid modifying all rows (the schema hints at this), or any other side effects. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the verb itself.

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 sentence, but the parenthetical '(Update)' is redundant and adds no value. It is concise but not maximally clear or structured. Slight deduction for the tautological parenthetical.

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 no annotations)Skip and an output schema exists, but the description provides no context about side effects, safety, or when to use it. It does not mention that it is a bulk update, requires caution, or any prerequisites like needing a where clause to avoid updating all rows. The schema does describe where_clause, but the description itself is too sparse to be fully complete.

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 descriptions are thorough (100% coverage), including examples for data and clarifications for where_clause and where_params. The description does not add additional parameter semantics, but given the full schema descriptions, a 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 clearly states the action: 'Update matching records in a table with specified values'. The verb 'Update' and resource 'table' are specificlint. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like delete_records or insert_record, and the parenthetical '(Update)' adds redundancy.

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 on when to use this vs. alternatives like insert_records or delete_records. The description doesn't mention typical scenarios or prerequisites (e.g., needing to know the table schema). The where_clause requirement is in the schema but not in the description, so an agent might not know when to prefer this over execute_sql.

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