Update Drawing

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description mentions 'returns the modified object on success' but does not elaborate on side effects or notifications that openWorldHint implies. No contradictions with 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?

The description is concise with three sentences: purpose, partial update and return, and required parameters/API info. It is well-structured and front-loaded with no extraneous content.

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 7 parameters, including a nested object, and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, partial update, return value, and required parameters. It does not explain usage of nested parameters, but the schema provides sufficient detail. The API endpoint is included for context.

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 has 100% coverage with detailed parameter descriptions. The description only lists required parameters without adding extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. Therefore, the description adds minimal value for parameter semantics.

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 specified Drawing' and explains that only supplied fields are changed, indicating a partial update. It also mentions returning the modified object. This effectively distinguishes it from create or list operations.

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 says 'Use this to update an existing Drawings' but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or compare it to alternatives like create_drawing or delete_drawing. The context of partial update is implied, but no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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