update_solution_article

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Update' which implies a mutation, but fails to describe critical traits such as required permissions, whether changes are reversible, rate limits, or what the response looks like. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, directly stating the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 complexity of a mutation tool with 2 parameters (including a nested object), 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, parameter meanings, and expected outcomes, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 for undocumented parameters. It mentions 'a solution article' but doesn't explain the meaning of 'article_id' or 'article_fields', leaving both parameters semantically unclear. The description adds no value beyond what the schema's property names imply.

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 resource ('a solution article in Freshdesk'), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like 'create_solution_article' and 'view_solution_article' by specifying an update operation, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other update tools like 'update_solution_category'.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing article ID), exclusions, or comparisons to siblings like 'create_solution_article' or 'view_solution_article', leaving the agent without contextual usage cues.

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