update_achievement

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses key behavioral traits: the unsupported conditions_json update, the requirement of skills when setting exp, and the availability of absolute/relative set types. It also advises to verify changes in the app. Minor omission: no mention of error handling or idempotency.

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 concise, well-structured with a warning emoji, and front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy.

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 the tool's complexity (14 parameters, 1 required, no output schema), the description covers all essential behavioral aspects and constraints. It is sufficiently complete for an AI agent to use the tool correctly.

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?

All 14 parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds value beyond the schema by emphasizing important constraints (conditions_json unsupported, skills required with exp, set_type meanings). This supplementary context aids correct usage.

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 'achievement by ID', and specifies the modifiable fields (name, description, rewards, unlock status). It distinguishes itself from siblings like create_achievement and delete_achievement.

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 provides explicit guidance on when not to use the tool (for updating conditions_json) and suggests an alternative (delete and recreate). It also clarifies how to handle numeric rewards with set types. However, it does not explicitly contrast with other update tools or state when to use this over related tools.

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