lattice_update_env_var

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the deferred effect ('next deploy'), which is valuable. However, it does not mention permissions, idempotency, or error handling, leaving gaps 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?

Two sentences, each serving a clear purpose: first states the action and scope, second adds behavioral context. No redundant words, efficiently front-loaded.

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 few parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and a key behavioral aspect (deploy timing). It could mention return values or error states, but given low complexity, it is sufficiently 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds no additional detail beyond mapping 'value or secret flag' to the parameters. It does not clarify formats or constraints, so it meets the baseline 3.

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 specifies the verb 'Update' and the resource 'global environment variable', and lists what can be updated ('value or secret flag'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like lattice_create_env_var and lattice_delete_env_var.

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?

Provides useful context that changes take effect on next deploy, implying when to expect results. While it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool vs. alternatives, the purpose is clear enough to differentiate from create/delete.

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