bsky_update_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions authentication requirement but doesn't disclose other behavioral traits like whether this is a destructive operation (it likely is since it updates profile data), what happens to existing profile fields not mentioned, rate limits, or error conditions. The description is minimal and leaves critical behavioral aspects unspecified.

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 extremely concise - a single Japanese sentence that gets straight to the point. There's no wasted verbiage, though one could argue it's too brief given the tool's complexity. The authentication requirement is appropriately included in the main statement.

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 this is a mutation tool with 3 parameters, 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, but with an output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what fields can be updated, how null values are handled (all parameters accept null), or what the tool returns. The output schema existence means the description doesn't need to explain return values, but it should cover more about the update operation itself.

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%, so the description must compensate. However, the description provides no information about the three parameters (displayName, description, acting_handle), their purposes, formats, or constraints. The schema only provides titles and types, leaving semantics completely undocumented in both schema and description.

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 verb ('更新します' - update) and resource ('自分のプロフィール' - my profile), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from potential sibling tools like bsky_get_profile, which is a read operation versus this 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?

The description mentions authentication requirement ('要認証'), which provides some context about when to use this tool. However, it doesn't explain when to use this versus alternatives like bsky_post (for content creation) or bsky_set_threadgate (for thread settings), nor does it specify any prerequisites beyond authentication.

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