diapers_update_diaper_change

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the partial-update behavior ('Only provided fields are changed'), which is the main non-obvious trait, though it omits error behavior and return details; the available output schema mitigates the return question.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, followed by the one essential behavioral qualifier. No filler or repetition of schema details.

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 straightforward CRUD update with a fully documented schema and an output schema present, this is nearly complete. It could mention what happens when change_id does not exist, but that is the main gap.

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?

The schema already documents all 7 parameters at 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful partial-update semantics: unprovided fields are left unchanged, which clarifies the default-null parameters without contradicting 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?

The description names a specific action ('Update') and resource ('existing diaper change record'), and the 'existing' qualifier distinguishes it from create/delete siblings. It does not explicitly contrast with the other update tools, but the resource is 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?

'Update an existing diaper change record' gives clear context for when to choose this tool over create or delete equivalents. It does not list explicit exclusions or alternatives, but the partial-update sentence reinforces its intended use for modifying an existing record.

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