kopern_update_agent

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

Annotations indicate idempotent and not read-only. Description aligns by stating 'update any part' and mentioning granular control via add/remove arrays. It adds behavioral context beyond annotations, such as the ability to modify subcollections incrementally.

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 the key action, no extraneous information. Efficient and clear.

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 the complexity (14 parameters, no output schema), the description is minimal. It does not explain return behavior or error conditions, but it covers the core purpose adequately. Could be improved with more detail on usage context.

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 coverage is 100%, so each parameter is already described. The description's mention of add/remove arrays adds some context but is largely redundant with schema descriptions. Baseline score 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 tool updates an agent's config, skills, tools, or extensions. It uses a specific verb ('update') and resource ('agent'), and the mention of 'add/remove arrays' distinguishes it from creation or deletion tools among siblings.

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 usage for updating an existing agent but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention prerequisites or alternatives, though sibling context helps.

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