update_uib_component

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) with idempotent behavior. However, the description adds no extra behavioral detail such as whether updates are partial or full replacement, any permissions needed, or side effects. The safety profile is covered by annotations, but behavioral context beyond that is missing.

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 short and to the point, but the '[Scripting]' tag is unclear and adds noise without meaningful value. It is not overly verbose, but it under-specifies rather than being appropriately concise.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain return behavior, error handling, or whether the update is partial or full. Given the tool's simplicity, a few extra sentences about updatable fields and expected outcomes would make it complete.

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 only 33% (only sys_id is described), and the tool description does not mention any parameters or fields. The description fails to compensate for low schema coverage, leaving the agent without any guidance on what 'label' or 'description' mean in the update context.

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 action ('Update') and the resource ('UI Builder component'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_uib_component and list_uib_components. It is specific enough to convey the core purpose, though it does not enumerate which fields or attributes can be updated.

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 no context on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no notes on scenarios where it is appropriate. The '[Scripting]' tag is ambiguous and does not clarify usage.

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