update_database_row

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It identifies a mutation ('Update properties') and lists arguments, but does not state permissions, reversibility, partial-update semantics, or property-value format requirements.

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 front-loaded and concise, using Args/Returns sections with no filler. The Returns line is somewhat redundant because an output schema exists, but it does not bloat the text.

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?

An output schema exists, so return details are unnecessary in the description. However, for a mutation tool with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the description omits key operational context such as permissions, partial updates, and required property value formats.

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 must compensate. It names both parameters and gives basic meaning (page_id = row ID, properties = property_name->value map), but does not explain nested property value shapes or required formats.

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 states a specific verb+resource: 'Update properties on an existing Notion database row.' It distinguishes from create_database_row via 'existing' and from update_block via 'database row', giving an agent enough to select it correctly.

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?

No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance is provided. It does not tell the agent when to choose this over query_database, create_database_row, or update_block.

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