directus_update_version

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It mentions 'Update' implying mutation but provides no details about safety (reversible?), side effects, or what aspects of the version get modified. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata cruft rather than behavioral 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?

While brief (one sentence), the '[UNIFIED]' prefix is distracting metadata that doesn't aid comprehension. The actual content 'Update a version' is efficiently short but underspecified—this is under-documentation masquerading as conciseness.

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?

Given the presence of nested objects in parameters and multiple version-related sibling operations (create, delete, promote, get), the tool requires richer context. The description fails to explain the Directus content versioning concept or how this operation fits into the version lifecycle.

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 0% with no descriptions for the 'site', 'id', or 'data' parameters. The description offers no compensation—it doesn't explain what format 'site' expects (URL vs slug), whether 'id' is a version ID or item ID, or what structure belongs in the nested 'data' object.

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 '[UNIFIED] Update a version' essentially restates the tool name (tautology) and fails to specify what kind of version (content revision? software version?). It does not distinguish from siblings like directus_promote_version or directus_create_version, leaving the agent uncertain about the specific scope.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like directus_promote_version or directus_create_version. No mention of prerequisites such as whether the version must exist first or if specific permissions are required.

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