update-file-by-id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It only says 'Update a file' without disclosing whether this is a partial update (PATCH) or a full replacement, what permissions are required, whether changes are reversible, or what happens to unspecified fields. The mutation side effects are completely opaque.

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, direct sentence that states the action and target. It is concise with no filler. However, it is under-specified, which slightly detracts from the effectiveness of its conciseness.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and minimal description, the tool is incomplete for the agent. It does not explain the update semantics (e.g., whether attributes are merged or replaced), nor does it describe the response or errors. The 4 parameters and nested object require more context.

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 25% (only 'title' has a description). The description text provides no explanation of parameters like 'tags', 'attributes', or 'description'. It also fails to clarify the nested 'attributes' structure or accepted formats, leaving the agent to guess.

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 verb 'update' and the resource 'file', with 'by its ID' specifying the identifier. This distinguishes it from add-file, delete-file-by-id, and get-file-by-id siblings. However, it does not list which file properties can be updated, leaving the full scope vague.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is for updating file metadata (e.g., title, tags, description, attributes) or that file content is not affected. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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