mdl_account_update_profile_info

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

Annotations already declare the write/non-idempotent/non-destructive profile, but the description adds real value: patch semantics ('only non-null fields supplied are sent; omitted fields are preserved') and an explicit auth prerequisite ('host-configured MyDramaList authentication'). It stops short of describing failure modes or reversibility of overwritten fields.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the action, then patch semantics, auth, and a safety caveat. No filler, though the terse 'Account:' prefix style is slightly fragmentary.

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 with no output schema, the description covers patch behavior, auth requirement, and use-restriction, which is most of what an agent needs. It omits field-level constraints and any note on return/error behavior, leaving minor gaps.

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 0% across 5 parameters, so the description carries the burden. It supplies the cross-cutting non-null/preserve rule, which is the key semantic for all five fields, but does not clarify individual fields such as dob format, gender values, or what dob_privacy toggles beyond what their names suggest.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('update profile info') under a clear 'Account:' namespace, distinguishing it from sibling reads like mdl_account_get_profile and from the separate mdl_account_update_privacy. It never names the closest sibling (privacy update) explicitly, so sibling differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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?

Gives a clear gating condition ('use only for an explicit user request') that tells the agent when not to call it, which is valuable for a mutation. However, it does not route the agent to alternatives (e.g., mdl_account_update_privacy for privacy fields) or describe preconditions beyond authentication.

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