LessonPackagesUpdatePackagePeriod

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds no behavioral detail beyond 'Update', such as whether existing period settings are overwritten, how optional fields like bodyComment or bodyToDate affect the update, or any permission or side-effect requirements.

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 definition is a single direct sentence with no redundant phrasing or filler. It is concise and front-loaded, though its brevity leaves important semantic gaps.

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?

With five parameters, three required, no output schema, and no usage guidance, this one-sentence description is insufficient for an agent to know what 'period' means, which fields matter, or what happens on success. The surrounding sibling names imply broader package-management context, but the description does not connect to it.

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 does not clarify which parameters correspond to the 'period' being updated. Schema descriptions are weak: classId and pupilId only repeat 'integer (required)', bodyToDate and bodyComment lack semantic descriptions, and bodyLessonPackageDurationId is described only in Russian. The description fails to bridge the gap.

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 names a specific action ('Update'), a resource ('lesson package'), and the target aspect ('period'), so an agent can infer the core operation. However, 'period' is somewhat ambiguous and the description does not distinguish this tool from the sibling LessonPackagesSetPackage or LessonPackagesWriteOffLessons.

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?

No usage context is provided: the description does not state when to use this tool instead of LessonPackagesSetPackage, LessonPackagesGetList, or other sibling operations. There is no mention of prerequisites, target scenarios, or excluded cases.

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