natural_language_update

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

The description claims the tool performs an update (write operation), but the annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which is a direct contradiction. This severely misleads the agent about the tool's behavioral traits.

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 with 11 words, containing the essential action and a critical condition. It is concise and front-loaded without any redundant information.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description fails to explain what 'natural language update' entails, such as what fields can be updated or what the return value is. The contradiction with annotations also undermines completeness. The description needs more context to be fully useful.

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?

The input schema already has full parameter descriptions (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional meaning beyond the condition that WRITE_ENABLED must be true. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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' and the resource 'record using natural language', indicating a specific method (natural language) that distinguishes it from other update tools like update_record. It also mentions a requirement (WRITE_ENABLED=true), adding clarity.

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 provides a prerequisite (WRITE_ENABLED=true) but offers no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as update_record or other update tools. It does not specify conditions where this tool is preferable or when not to use it.

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