maimemo_update_phrase

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing about what is overwritten, whether the nested body replaces or merges existing fields, or the required authorization semantics.

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?

It is short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness; there is no front-loaded explanation of scope, constraints, or the nested phrase payload an agent must construct.

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?

For a destructive mutation tool with a required nested object and a mandatory confirm flag, the description omits everything an agent needs beyond the safety hints: what the update affects, how body nesting works, and when this tool is the right choice over its siblings.

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 100%, so the parameters (id, body, confirm) are documented in the schema itself, establishing the baseline of 3. The description contributes no additional meaning, and notably the nested body object carries only "暂无文档" in the schema, which the description does not compensate for.

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?

"更新例句" states a specific verb (更新) and resource (例句), so an agent knows the operation type. However, it gives no scope or detail and does nothing to distinguish this tool from siblings like maimemo_update_interpretation or maimemo_update_note, which follow the same pattern.

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?

There is no guidance whatsoever about when to use this tool versus the create/list/delete phrase siblings, nor any prerequisite or context. The entire description is a four-character label.

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