Update Power_panel

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

Description reinforces PATCH semantics (only provided fields change) and specifies return formats (markdown or JSON). Annotations already indicate destructiveHint and idempotentHint, so the description adds useful behavioral context 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?

Four sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose, usage instruction, return format. Front-loaded with key information, no wasted words.

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?

Covers main aspects: PATCH behavior, required parameter, return options. Lacks explanation of error handling, prerequisites, or detailed parameter semantics for most fields, but the schema partially covers that. No output schema exists, so description compensates moderately.

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 44%, so baseline is 3. Description explains 'id' requirement and response_format parameter, but does not add meaning for the other 7 parameters beyond what the schema provides. Insufficient compensation for 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?

Clearly states the tool updates an existing power_panel using PATCH semantics. The verb ('Update') and resource ('power_panel') are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling create/delete tools.

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?

Provides instructions on how to use (supply id and fields to change) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create or delete. No exclusions or when-not-to-use are mentioned.

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