update_tag

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond annotations: it explicitly discloses PATCH semantics — only supplied fields are changed. This is valuable given the idempotentHint annotation already signals non-destructive update behavior, and no contradiction exists.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core PATCH behavior, followed by helpful field enumeration and a targeted cross-reference. No wasted words.

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 single-tag PATCH tool, the description covers the key behavioral distinction, editable fields, and routes document-tag operations elsewhere. It omits return-value details, but there is no output schema and the core calling context is sufficiently covered.

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 43%, so the description partially compensates by listing editable fields and clarifying 'match' as a matching pattern and 'parent' as a hierarchy ID. However, it adds little for other parameters like color, is_insensitive, or matching_algorithm, which rely on the schema or naming.

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 a specific action: updating fields on exactly one tag, with PATCH semantics. It distinguishes itself from document-level operations by naming the sibling edit_documents_bulk and clarifying it is not for adding/removing tags on documents.

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 gives an explicit when-not-to-use instruction: to add or remove tags on documents, use edit_documents_bulk with specific methods. It does not mention the sibling edit_tags_bulk for batch tag updates, so alternative usage guidance is slightly incomplete.

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