routines_update

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and non-destructive. The description adds that specific fields can be updated but does not disclose any side effects, auth requirements, or rate limits. Minimal additional value beyond annotations.

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?

Description is a single sentence, front-loaded with the action. However, it omits important parameter details and could be more structured, but remains concise.

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?

No output schema, 6 parameters with nested objects, and the description fails to explain return values, required fields, or clarify ambiguous parameters. With sibling tools focusing on routines, more details are needed for correct invocation.

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%, yet description mentions only 4 of 6 parameters, omitting required 'id' and the enum 'schedule_preset'. The description uses 'schedule' ambiguously, not mapping to 'cron_expression' or 'schedule_preset'. Fails 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 explicitly states the verb 'Update' and the resource 'Routine', and lists updatable fields (name, schedule, timezone, input_params). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like routines_create or routines_delete.

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 implies usage through the word 'update' but provides no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives, no when-not-to-use, and no prerequisites.

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