Update Weather Log

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the non-destructive update nature is clear. The description adds that it returns the modified object on success and that only supplied fields are changed, which provides useful behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 (4 sentences plus a link) but somewhat unstructured with markdown and a URL. It front-loads the purpose but could be more streamlined. Every sentence adds value, though the formatting could be improved.

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 moderate complexity (4 parameters, one nested object, no output schema), the description is relatively complete. It specifies the endpoint, required parameters, that only supplied fields change, and returns the modified object. It references a guide for attachments, filling a gap. The lack of output schema is mitigated by stating the return object.

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 descriptions for all parameters. The description adds specific guidance for the 'id' parameter (use log date in YYYYMMDD format), which improves clarity. It also lists required parameters. The link to the Daily Log guide provides additional context for attachments, compensating for the weather_log parameter's generic schema description.

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 explicitly states 'Update single Weather Log' and 'updates an existing Daily Log records', clearly specifying the verb (update) and resource (Weather Log). The tool name and title reinforce this, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like create_weather_log_project_v1_0 by focusing on update.

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 explains that it updates existing Daily Log records and that only supplied fields are changed, implying partial updates. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like creating a new weather log or using bulk update tools. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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