Update Buildin database

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses partial update behavior ('Only fields you pass are modified') and property removal specifics, but does not cover idempotency, side effects on existing data, or authorization requirements.

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 at two sentences with no redundant text. However, it could be slightly more structured or include a brief summary of the return value.

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 complex update tool with 6 parameters and nested objects, the description covers core functionality but omits details on response format, error scenarios, or behavior when updating schema that affects existing data. With no output schema, some return value context would improve completeness.

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 67% (4 of 6 parameters have descriptions). The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, mainly reiterating the removal behavior already noted in the properties parameter's schema description.

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 'Update a database's title, icon, cover, properties schema, or archive flag' using a specific verb and resource. It lists the modifiable fields and distinguishes from siblings like buildin_create_database and buildin_update_page.

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 implies usage when modifying an existing database but lacks explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or comparisons with alternatives. It does not provide guidance on prerequisites or context.

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