update_icp

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond 'update'. No annotations are present, so the description should cover aspects like idempotency, partial vs. full update, side effects, or return values, but it does not.

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 extremely short (4 words) but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It fails to provide essential details while maintaining brevity.

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 no output schema, the description should explain return values, success/failure behavior, and usage patterns. It does none of these. With moderate complexity (5 params, nested objects), the description is grossly inadequate.

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 coverage is only 40% (workspace_id and id have descriptions). The description adds no parameter information; it fails to compensate for the low coverage. Parameters like name, description, and criteria remain undocumented, leaving the agent without clear meaning.

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 'Update an ICP' clearly states the action (update) and the resource (ICP), distinguishing it from siblings like create_icp and delete_icp. However, it lacks context about what an ICP represents.

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 on when to use this tool versus create_icp or other alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing an existing ICP, or conditions that should be met before updating.

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