update_insight_status

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

The description adds context beyond annotations by noting the constraint on public API insights and the deprecation. Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description aligns with that. No contradiction.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, then constraints and deprecation. The first sentence is slightly broad but overall efficient and well-structured.

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?

Covers the core action and key constraint, but lacks details on return values (no output schema), potential side effects of destructive action, or when to use dismissalDetails. Given the tool's complexity and destructive hint, more completeness would help.

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?

Description adds minimal parameter detail beyond the input schema. Schema covers status, customerContext, and dismissalDetails but not sourceID or insightKey; description does not elaborate on those. With 60% schema coverage, more parameter guidance would be beneficial.

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 'Updates the display status of a single insight', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_insight and delete_insight_result, and also notes deprecation in favor of a newer endpoint.

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 states that only insights created via the public API can be updated, and provides a deprecation warning with an alternative endpoint, guiding when not to use this tool.

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