update_member_note

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

Discloses that the tool replaces the entire note body, requires API key authentication, has max 10 concurrent requests, respects read-only/dry-run modes, and returns 404 if note or member doesn't exist. Covers key behaviors beyond what annotations would provide (none present).

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 and well-structured: purpose sentence, behavior note, usage tips, authentication/limits, parameter descriptions, return value. Every sentence adds value; no fluff.

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?

Given sibling tools and schema, description provides all necessary context: distinguishes from related tools, explains parameter sources, error conditions, and return format. Output schema is mentioned but not included, yet the return fields are listed.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining each parameter: list_id obtained from list_audiences, email_address of member, note_id from list_member_notes, note (max 1000 chars, replaces previous). Adds meaning beyond schema names/types.

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 'Update the text of an existing member note. Replaces the entire note body.' This provides a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from add_member_note and delete_member_note.

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?

Explicitly directs to use list_member_notes to find note_ids, and provides alternatives: add_member_note for creating, delete_member_note for removal. Also mentions authentication and concurrency limits.

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