update_contact

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true, so the description's lack of additional behavioral context (e.g., whether update is partial or full replacement, or side effects) is partially compensated. However, the description adds no extra transparency beyond the annotation, scoring a baseline 3.

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 one short sentence that conveys the core purpose and a key requirement (wa_id). It is efficient and front-loaded, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing fields).

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 has 6 parameters, no output schema, and is destructive, the description should address what happens on update, whether it returns the updated contact, and more behavioral details. It leaves many questions unanswered, making it incomplete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must provide meaning for each parameter. It only mentions that wa_id is required and others are optional, but does not explain what each field (e.g., email, phone, country_code) does or how they affect the contact. This is insufficient.

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 ('actualiza' = update) and the resource ('contacto existente'), and specifies that wa_id is required. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_contact or delete_contact.

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 implies usage by stating wa_id is required and other fields are optional, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., use create_contact if contact doesn't exist). Context is clear but lacks exclusion guidance.

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