update_agent_config

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds the key behavioral detail that only provided fields are updated, but it omits other behavioral aspects such as side effects, required permissions, validation failures, or whether the update is synchronous. Some transparency is present, but not comprehensive.

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 two concise sentences with no wasted words. The core action and the critical partial-update behavior are front-loaded, and the alternative tool is mentioned immediately after.

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?

The tool is complex with 9 parameters and nested objects, but the schema is rich and covers all parameters. The description adds the essential context of partial updates and correctly routes prompt-specific changes. Without annotations or an output schema, a brief note on return value could help, but it is not necessary 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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents all parameters in detail. The description mentions general categories (name, language, first message, voice settings) but does not add meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states the tool updates an agent's configuration (name, language, first message, voice settings) and distinguishes it from update_agent_prompt. It uses a specific verb and resource, making the tool's function unambiguous.

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 explicitly notes that only provided fields are updated, which clarifies partial-update behavior. It also names update_agent_prompt as the alternative for prompt/instruction updates, giving the agent a clear routing decision.

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