update_build

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions updating attributes but does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, or idempotency. The description is adequate but could be more informative.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. Front-loads the action and a key example, making it easy to scan.

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 simple update tool with two parameters, the description covers the essential purpose and usage context. No output schema exists, but the agent can infer typical CRUD behavior. Minor gap: does not mention return value.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions. The description adds context by linking 'export compliance (encryption usage)' to the parameter 'uses_non_exempt_encryption', explaining its significance ('Set to false if your app only uses standard iOS encryption').

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Update', the resource 'build's attributes', and provides a concrete example ('export compliance/encryption usage'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_build' or 'submit_build_for_beta_review'.

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?

Explicitly states 'Required before distributing a build', giving a clear condition for use. While it doesn't mention alternatives, the context implies it is a preparatory step before distribution.

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