update_circle_description

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the mutation and non-destructive nature are known. The description adds valuable context: the required permission level (admin/owner) and the special behavior of passing an empty string to clear the description. It also states the return format (JSON of updated circle), going beyond annotations.

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 concise, with a clear opening sentence followed by structured Args and Returns sections. No fluff or redundant information; every line adds value.

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 simple two-parameter update tool with an output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, permission, parameters, and return type. It is complete and self-sufficient, with no missing critical information.

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%, so the description carries the full burden of explaining parameters. It clearly explains circle_id and description, including the special case of empty string to clear. This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 action ('Update a circle's description') with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like update_circle_name and update_circle_config by focusing solely on the description field, so an agent can easily tell them apart.

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 does not explicitly provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions a prerequisite (admin or owner level) but no exclusions or alternative suggestions. The usage is implied by the name and the purpose, but not explicitly stated.

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