update_guest_address

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. However, the description adds nothing beyond them: it does not say whether an update replaces the whole address or patches individual fields, nor whether omitting a field clears it, which matters for a destructive update.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is tight, though arguably too terse given the tool's parameter count.

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?

For a 7-parameter mutation tool with 29% schema coverage and no output schema, the one-line description is inadequate. It does not cover field semantics, partial-vs-full update behavior, or return expectations.

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 only 29% (just guest_group_id and country_code), so the description is expected to compensate and does not. It never explains that city, address1, address2, postal_code, and state_province are the mutable address components, leaving five parameters undocumented in both places.

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?

States a specific verb (Update) and resource (a guest group's mailing address), which is clearly distinguishable from the other update_* siblings like update_vendor or update_event. It is clear but adds no scope detail or differentiation beyond the noun itself.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The only hint of context is the schema's note that guest_group_id comes from list_guests, which the description does not surface.

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