update_directory_line

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

Describes PATCH behavior (only provided fields modified). No annotations provided, but description does not cover side effects, error handling, or permissions. Minimal but adequate.

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?

Concise three-sentence description with front-loaded action and semantics. No unnecessary words; each sentence 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?

Covers purpose and typical use. Output schema is present, so return values are handled. Missing prerequisites and error behavior, but sufficient for a moderately complex tool with 4 parameters.

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 coverage is 100% with good descriptions for each parameter. Description adds no further parameter detail beyond typical use context. Baseline 3 as per guidelines.

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?

Clearly states 'Partially update an existing directory line' with specific verb (update), resource (directory line), and PATCH semantics. Differentiates from sibling tools like create_directory_line and delete_directory_line.

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?

Provides typical use case: updating technical address after configuration change. Implies usage for other optional fields. Does not explicitly compare with alternatives like update_routing_code, but context is clear enough.

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