update_collection

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'update', which implies mutation, but does not explain whether the update is partial or full, whether fields are replaced or merged, if there are any side effects, or what errors might occur. Minimal behavioral context is provided.

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 clear sentence with no wasted words, but it is under-specified. While concise, it could be slightly expanded to mention key behavioral details without becoming overly verbose. The structure is front-loaded but minimal for a tool with 4 parameters.

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?

This tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, placing the full burden on the description. The description only states the action and resource, omitting return values, the requirement of the id parameter, and how fields are applied. This is insufficient for the tool's complexity and leaves significant gaps.

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 provides descriptions for all 4 parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already states, such as relationships between fields or default behaviors.

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 'Update an existing collection' clearly states the action (update) and resource (collection), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_collection, create_collection, and delete_collection. It is specific enough to convey the core function, though it does not elaborate on which fields can be updated (covered by the schema).

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_collection or update_product. It does not mention prerequisites, when updating is appropriate, or exclusions. The description is purely a statement of action with no contextual direction.

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