update_zone_priority

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

With no annotations present, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states 'Change' (implying a mutation) but does not mention side effects, such as whether the zone needs to be refilled or if the change is immediately applied. This omission limits the agent's ability to anticipate consequences.

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, concise sentence with no extra words. However, it sacrifices essential information for brevity. While it earns credit for efficiency, the lack of detail makes it less useful.

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 absence of an output schema, annotations, and parameter descriptions, the tool description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns after the update or any side effects. The agent lacks sufficient context to use this tool confidently.

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 0%, meaning the schema provides no explanation for parameters. The description fails to add any meaning beyond naming the parameters, such as the expected format for 'zone_id' or valid range for 'priority'. This leaves the agent with insufficient information to correctly invoke the tool.

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 identifies the action ('Change') and the resource ('priority level of a zone'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'update_zone_clearance' or 'update_zone_net'. However, it does not specify what type of zone (e.g., copper zone) is involved, leaving some ambiguity.

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 versus alternatives like 'update_zone_clearance' or 'update_zone_net'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or which zone types are applicable, leaving the agent without decision support.

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