update_action

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

Annotations indicate idempotent and not destructive. Description adds valuable context: auto-resumes action when providing clarification response, requires sync verification. Does not contradict 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?

Two sentences with front-loaded purpose. Every word contributes: first sentence states function and three use cases, second adds critical requirement. No redundancy.

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?

Complete for a mutation tool: covers purpose, detailed use cases, required parameter, and behavioral effects (auto-resume). Output schema exists, so return values need not be described.

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% and parameter descriptions are clear. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema (only the sync verification requirement), meeting the baseline.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'update' and resource 'action request', listing three distinct use cases (push notes, attach data, respond to clarification). Clearly distinguishes from siblings as no other tool updates an action.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: to add reasoning, attach extracted data, or respond to clarification requests. Mentions requirement for mailbox_md_version. Does not explicitly exclude scenarios but covers primary use cases.

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