update_access_list

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'update', but does not explain idempotency, error handling on non-existent access list, permission requirements, or whether fields are overwritten or merged. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 very short, which is good for conciseness, but it sacrifices substance. It is the bare minimum, failing to provide necessary context, so it is not effectively concise.

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 complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what each parameter does, the effect of the update, or the return value. This tool requires much more detail.

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%, meaning neither the schema nor the description explains the parameters. The description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names, leaving terms like 'satisfy_any' and 'pass_auth' completely opaque.

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 the action (update) and the resource (access list), distinguishing it from create, delete, get, and list siblings. However, it does not specify which fields can be updated beyond the resource type, which would be helpful.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like creating a new access list or updating other resources. The description lacks any context about prerequisites or scenarios for use.

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