update_label

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

The description only states 'Actualiza', which implies modification. Annotations include destructiveHint=true, which may suggest data destruction, but the description does not clarify the impact of updating (e.g., whether unspecified fields are cleared or kept). No mention of authorization, side effects, or behavior beyond the annotation. The description adds minimal value beyond annotations.

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 sentence, concise and front-loaded with the verb and resource. However, given the tool has 4 parameters and no output schema, the brevity may sacrifice necessary detail. It earns a 4 for efficiency but lacks structure.

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?

The tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and annotations with destructiveHint=true. The description does not explain return values, error conditions, or the full effect of the operation (e.g., whether it overwrites or merges fields). It is incomplete given the complexity.

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 0%, meaning the description does not explain parameters. It vaguely mentions 'título, color, descripción' but omits the required label_id parameter and provides no details on constraints, formats, or behavior (e.g., what happens if description is omitted). The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 states 'Actualiza una etiqueta existente (título, color, descripción)', which clearly indicates the verb (update) and resource (label). It mentions specific fields that can be updated, providing clarity. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like create_label or delete_label, but the word 'existente' helps distinguish from creation.

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 such as create_label, delete_label, or search_labels. The description does not specify prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions, leaving the agent without context for proper selection.

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