collection_copies_v1_patch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses auth requirements and required body, but does not explain the PATCH semantics (e.g., partial update behavior), potential side effects, response format, or whether fields are overwritten. The reference to an external guide is helpful but does not compensate for the lack of inline behavioral disclosure.

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, front-loaded with the endpoint and action. It efficiently packs in required parameters, authentication, and a pointer to further docs without redundancy. Perfectly sized.

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?

This is a mutation tool with a required body, no output schema, and no annotations. The description lacks critical details about what the body should contain, expected behavior, or consequences. The reference to a guide is useful but does not make the tool self-contained enough for an agent to invoke correctly without external lookup.

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%, with each parameter having a description, so the baseline is 3. The description adds that body is required (already in schema) and specifies OAuth token sources, but does not explain the body's structure or what fields can be updated. This matches the schema's minimal information without adding significant meaning.

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 identifies the tool as '[PATCH] /collection/copies/v1 - Update Copies', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling CRUD operations (collection_copies_v1_delete, get, post) by naming 'Update' and 'PATCH'.

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 mentions required body and OAuth token, and points to a guide for full calling instructions. It implies usage for updating existing copies but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like POST (create) or DELETE. Absence of explicit exclusions or alternatives prevents a higher score.

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