timeiq_person_update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'Update' implying mutation, but does not detail whether the update is partial or full replacement, what happens if changeset is empty, or any validation behavior. Minimal disclosure.

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, efficient sentence. It conveys the core purpose and a key constraint without any fluff.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and three parameters with zero description, the tool is substantially under-documented. Missing details on changeset contents, dry_run behavior, and response structure make it hard for an agent to use correctly.

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 0%, and the description adds no information about the parameters (slug, changeset, dry_run). It only mentions 'by their slug' but does not explain changeset format or dry_run purpose. Agent has no guidance beyond schema types.

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?

Description clearly states the action (update), resource (team member record), identifier (slug), and an access constraint (Admin only). It differentiates from sibling tools like person_create, person_delete, etc.

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 'Admin only' constraint is useful, but there is no guidance on when to use this tool versus similar ones like timeiq_person_update_preferences or timeiq_person_activate. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use advice.

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