connector_network_patch

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

Discloses that 'confirm' must be true to execute and supports dry_run. However, lacks annotations and does not detail side effects, authorization requirements, or rate limits. For a PATCH operation, it provides basic but not complete behavioral transparency.

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?

Relatively concise, listing arguments and return value. However, the inclusion of a non-existent 'settings' parameter wastes words and reduces efficiency.

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 tool's complexity (5 params, no annotations, output schema exists but not described), the description leaves gaps: no explanation of response format beyond 'raw response', no error handling info, and no context for the 'dry_run' preview.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description attempts to explain parameters but includes 'settings' which is not in the schema, creating confusion. It also fails to describe the 'body' parameter's structure or the exact meaning of 'path' sub-path.

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 it proxies a PATCH request to the Network Application, which distinguishes it from other HTTP methods like PUT. However, the mention of a 'settings' parameter not present in the schema slightly muddies the purpose.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., connector_network_put). The description implies it's for partial updates, but does not state when-not or provide alternatives.

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