app_clip_advanced_experiences__update

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

Annotations already state readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description does not contradict them. The PATCH endpoint adds minimal behavioral context (e.g., partial update semantics) but does not disclose auth, response shape, or side effects.

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 sentence plus endpoint, highly efficient and front-loaded. It could include slightly more context without bloat, but it does not waste words.

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 very complex nested body schema, the minimal description relies heavily on the schema and annotations. It lacks guidance on update scope, relationships, or when an update is appropriate, but the schema is exhaustive and annotations cover safety, making it minimally complete.

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?

Both parameters (id and body) have descriptions in the schema, with id noting it comes from a list call and body describing the JSON:API request. The tool description itself adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action ('Update') and the resource ('App Clip advanced experience'), and the PATCH endpoint reinforces the update verb. This distinguishes it from sibling create and get operations.

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 app_clip_advanced_experiences__create or app_clip_advanced_experiences__get. The only implicit signal is the PATCH method, which is insufficient for establishing usage exclusions or prerequisites.

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