measurements_update_height

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

The description discloses that only provided fields are changed, which is a key behavioral trait and adds value beyond the schema. However, it does not mention error handling, validation, or prerequisites beyond the existence of the record. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and this is only partially addressed.

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 short sentences, with the main purpose stated first and the key caveat second. No unnecessary words, and the structure is front-loaded for quick comprehension.

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 update tool with a well-defined schema and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and behavior. It doesn't elaborate on error conditions, but that is acceptable given the simplicity and the presence of an output schema that likely documents return values.

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 input schema already describes all parameters clearly, including formats and units (e.g., YYYY-MM-DD, centimeters). The description does not add any additional parameter semantics. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 applies.

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 action (update), the resource (height record), and the partial-update behavior, distinguishing it from create/delete and other measurement types. The verb and resource are specific, and the 'only provided fields are changed' clause adds precision that separates it from full-replacement update tools.

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 indicates the tool is for updating an existing height record, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, such as creating a new record or updating other measurement types. The name and context imply usage, but no direct exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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