update_event

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is a non-destructive, idempotent write operation (readOnlyHint false, idempotentHint true, destructiveHint false). The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as error handling or side effects, but does not contradict the 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 extremely concise at four words but lacks necessary detail. While front-loaded, it does not earn its place by adding value; important information about parameters and usage is missing, making it under-specified rather than properly 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 three simple parameters and no output schema, the description should clarify that only events existing can be updated and mention optional parameters. It fails to provide this basic context, leaving the tool's complete behavior underdefined.

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 schema description coverage at 0%, the description should compensate by explaining parameter roles. It only says 'Update event details' without mentioning that 'id' is required or that 'name' and 'event_date' are optional updatable fields. This adds minimal value beyond the schema itself.

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 event details' clearly indicates the action (update) and resource (event). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_event, delete_event, get_event, and list_events, making the purpose clear.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it updates existing events only, nor does it exclude any scenarios. This lack of usage context forces the agent to infer from the tool name alone.

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