vast_update_companion

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Update an existing VAST companion,' which implies mutation but does not disclose how updates behave (partial vs full overwrite), error handling on nonexistent IDs, permission requirements, or return values. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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, concise sentence with no redundancy. However, it is very minimal, bordering on under-specification, so it does not earn a 5 for effective use of brevity to convey additional useful context.

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?

The description is extremely terse and provides almost no context. Without annotations or an output schema, the agent has no information about the implications of updating a companion, when it should be used relative to other VAST tools, or what the side effects might be. This is incomplete for a tool with four parameters.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter information, but the schema already documents all four parameters (id, name, width, height) with descriptive text. The description does not need to compensate for schema gaps.

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 states 'Update an existing VAST companion,' clearly indicating the verb (update) and resource (VAST companion). It differentiates from sibling tools like create/get/delete by the update verb, though it adds no detail beyond the tool's name.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing an existing companion ID, or any exclusion criteria. The description lacks context about when to use update vs create/delete.

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