update_wifi_qr

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that updating WiFi data changes the QR image content, which adds value beyond a simple 'update' statement. However, it does not mention permissions, reversibility, or other side effects.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and a key constraint. Every word earns its place; no redundancy.

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?

No output schema and no annotations. The description is brief: it covers purpose and a behavioral note but lacks return value description, error handling, or guidance on parameter interactions. Adequate for a simple update, but minimal.

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%, and the description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Update', the resource 'WiFi QR code', and a constraint 'Only works on QR codes created with type='wifi''. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_wifi_qr or update_qr_destination.

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?

Explicitly states the precondition that the QR code must have type='wifi', which guides when to use. Does not list alternatives or when not to use, but the constraint is clear.

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