update_via_size

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'update,' implying mutation, but does not mention side effects, error conditions, permissions, or return behavior. This is insufficient for a write operation.

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 a single clear sentence with no extraneous information. It is perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description should provide more context. It lacks information about what happens on success/failure, how to reference the via, and any validation rules. The tool's complexity is low, but the description is incomplete.

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 description mentions 'diameter and/or drill size,' which directly maps to the two optional parameters, adding meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not explain the required 'via_id' parameter or any constraints on values. Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description compensates partially.

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 verb 'update' and specifies the resource 'via' and the attributes being updated ('diameter and/or drill size'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like update_via_net or update_track_width.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, no prerequisites, and no context about typical use cases. It simply states the function.

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