vast42_update_placement

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

There are no annotations, and the description only says 'Update' without disclosing behavioral details such as whether unspecified fields are reset, required permissions, idempotency, or side effects. The agent is left without important safety or operational context.

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 no filler, making it very concise. However, the brevity comes at the cost of missing behavioral and usage context, so it is not perfect.

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?

With 7 parameters, a nested object, no output schema, and no annotations, the tool requires more descriptive context to be fully understood. The minimal description leaves significant gaps about how updates behave and what the response will be.

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 schema covers all 7 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the description does not need to add param details. However, it also adds no extra value beyond the schema, keeping it at the baseline.

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 specific resource ('VAST 4.2 placement'), which distinguishes it from sibling create/delete tools for the same resource. It is direct and unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_placement or vast_update_placement, nor any mention of prerequisites, typical scenarios, or contexts where this tool is preferred.

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