children_update_child

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the partial-update behavior ('Only provided fields are changed'), but omits potential edge cases like invalid slug handling, whether null values clear fields, or any error/success response details. The one disclosed behavior is useful but not enough for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

A single 8-word sentence that front-loads the core action and the key behavioral caveat. No filler or repetition of the schema.

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?

For a simple single-resource update, the description plus the fully documented schema and output schema cover most needs. It lacks error/edge-case context and explicit alternate usage, but the essential identification and partial-update semantics are present. This is above the minimum viable but not exhaustive.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that omitted fields remain unchanged, which explains the null-default schema pattern. It also indicates the slug is the targeting key, complementing the schema.

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?

States a clear verb ('Update') and resource ('child's profile') with a specific identification method ('by slug'). Clearly distinct from siblings like children_create_child, children_get_child, and children_list_children.

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 implies this is for updating an existing child, but does not explicitly contrast with create or list, nor state prerequisites like 'child must exist'. The partial-update note is more of a behavior than a usage condition, so guidance is only implied.

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