Update Inspection Log

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

The description adds 'only the supplied fields are changed' (partial update) and 'returns the modified object on success', which are beyond the annotations. Annotations already indicate non-read-only and non-destructive, so the added value is moderate but not rich.

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 paragraph with a link and some redundancy (e.g., 'Update single Inspection Log' and 'Updates the specified Daily Log records'). It is front-loaded with the key action, but could be more concise by removing the endpoint line, which is already inferable.

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?

For a simple update tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description provides purpose, behavior, required parameters, and a reference guide. It covers the essentials adequately.

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, but the description adds context by naming required parameters and mentioning partial update behavior. The link to the Daily Log guide provides additional meaning for attachments and locations, going beyond the schema.

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 single Inspection Log' and 'Updates the specified Daily Log records', making the action and resource clear. The verb 'Update' and the title 'Update Inspection Log' distinguish it from creation tools like 'create_inspection_log', but no explicit sibling comparison is made.

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 indicates when to use: 'Use this to update an existing Daily Log records'. It specifies required parameters and links to a guide, but it does not provide exclusions or compare with alternative tools for similar updates.

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