update-person

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states the action without explaining key traits such as idempotency, partial update support, error handling, or what happens if the people_id does not exist. The agent lacks critical 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?

The description is very concise, consisting of a single phrase with no superfluous words. However, it lacks structure or prioritization, making it less effective for quick scanning by an AI agent.

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 tool has 9 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain the update behavior, return value, error states, or relationship to other tools, leaving agents with significant gaps.

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%, with each parameter having a description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3. It does not clarify parameter relationships or usage nuances.

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 'Update an existing person' clearly states the verb (update) and resource (person), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'create-person', 'delete-person', and update tools for other entities such as 'update-account' or 'update-client'.

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 on when to use this tool, its prerequisites (e.g., person must exist), or when to prefer alternatives like 'create-person' for new entries or 'get-person' for reading. The agent receives no contextual cues beyond the tool's name.

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