Update Circuit_termination

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true. The description adds PATCH semantics context and return format options. However, it does not explain what 'destructive' means in this context or discuss auth, rate limits, or side effects of modifying certain fields. It adds some value beyond annotations but misses important behavioral details.

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 very concise: three sentences covering purpose, required input, and return format. Every sentence earns its place, and the information is front-loaded.

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's complexity (14 params, no output schema, destructiveHint annotation), the description is adequate for basic updates but lacks details on parameter behavior, default values, and potential side effects. It does not explain how tags or custom_fields are handled or the meaning of term_side/termination_id.

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 14 parameters and only 29% schema description coverage, the description does little to compensate. It provides a general note about partial updates but does not explain individual parameters like tags, term_side, or custom_fields. The mention of response_format is implicit but helpful.

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 tool updates an existing circuit_termination using PATCH semantics, specifying that only provided fields are changed. It distinguishes itself from get, create, list, and delete siblings by its focus on partial updates.

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 explicitly instructs to supply the numeric 'id' and only the fields to change, and notes that omitting a field leaves it unchanged. It provides clear usage context but does not explicitly mention when not to use or suggest alternatives like get_circuit_termination for viewing current state.

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