Update Asn

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

The description claims PATCH semantics (only provided fields changed) which is non-destructive, but annotations include destructiveHint=true, contradicting the description. This misleads the agent about potential data destruction.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences: purpose, usage, return format. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description adequately describes return options (markdown/json). Missing error behavior or prerequisites, but acceptable for an update 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 coverage is only 44% (4 of 9 parameters documented). The description adds general PATCH usage guidance but does not elaborate on the 5 undocumented parameters, failing to compensate for the low coverage.

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 'existing asn in NetBox', and specifies 'PATCH semantics'. This unambiguously distinguishes it from create, get, or delete siblings.

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?

It instructs to supply the numeric 'id' and only fields to change, and that omitting fields leaves them unchanged. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools, the context of an update tool is clear.

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