app_screenshots_update_instance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that this is a PATCH operation and points at AppScreenshotUpdateRequest, but it does not state what is mutable, whether changes are partial, what permissions are required, or what side effects occur.

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 short, but it wastes space by repeating the endpoint in parentheses and then outsourcing the payload details to an external OpenAPI reference. It is concise in length but not optimally structured for an agent.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a nested free-form body object, the description is not complete enough. It leaves the updatable fields, permissions, and response behavior undisclosed and relies on an external schema reference.

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?

The input schema already documents both parameters at 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats the body schema reference but adds no additional meaning about the id or the update payload beyond what the schema provides.

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 identifies the endpoint being called (PATCH /v1/appScreenshots/{id}), which implies updating an app screenshot instance, but it does not explain what aspect of the screenshot is updated. It is more an HTTP route than a plain-language statement of purpose, and sibling differentiation depends mostly on the tool name and method.

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 app_screenshots_create_instance, app_screenshots_get_instance, app_screenshots_delete_instance, or screenshot-set operations. The endpoint alone does not tell the agent what conditions call for an update.

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