vnt_update

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden of disclosing side effects. It only says 'Update', which implies mutation, but does not state whether existing translations are overwritten, what happens if an ID is missing, or if any permissions are required. No error behavior or return value is described.

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, action-first, with no fluff. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded, though it could arguably include more context without becoming verbose.

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 no output schema, only 2 params, and no annotations, so the description must provide essential operational context. It fails to explain return values, error handling, prerequisites for calling it, or the relationship between the 'work' parameter and 'bundle.jsonl'. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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%, so the description must compensate. It hints that 'id' is a stable entry ID and 'translation' is the new value, but it does not explain what 'work' refers to (e.g., a file path, workspace, or bundle identifier) and leaves the structure of 'items' ambiguous beyond the schema.

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 verb 'Update', the resource 'translations', and the locator 'by stable entry ID in bundle.jsonl'. It differentiates from sibling tools like vnt_insert (insert) and vnt_query (query) by specifying the update action and the ID-based targeting.

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 given on when to use this tool versus vnt_insert, vnt_extract, or other translation-related tools. There are no prerequisites (e.g., the entry must already exist) or exclusions mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name.

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