update_spam_listing

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a mutating upsert operation ('Add or update') but does not explain whether existing spam data is fully replaced, partially merged, or requires special permissions. The behavior is minimally transparent but lacks important operational detail.

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 with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and resource. However, it is so terse that it sacrifices useful context, though conciseness itself is handled well.

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 a nested, loosely-typed spam_data parameter, no annotations, and many related sibling tools, this description is insufficient on its own. An agent would not know what fields spam_data should contain, what zoid refers to, or how this tool relates to get_spam_listing_info and remove_spam_listing.

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 0%, and the description does not explain 'zoid' or the structure and required fields of 'spam_data'. The schema only marks spam_data as an object with additionalProperties: true, leaving an agent without enough information to construct a valid request.

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 states a specific action ('Add or update') on a specific resource ('organization spam listing info'), making the tool's core function clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like get_spam_listing_info or remove_spam_listing, but the verb 'update' is sufficient to imply a write operation.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_spam_listing_info, remove_spam_listing, or update_spam_process_type. The description only states what the tool does, not when it should be selected or what prerequisites or conditions apply.

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