build_beta_details__update

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

With annotations present (idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), the description adds only the HTTP method and endpoint, which are not truly behavioral traits. It does not disclose side effects, permission requirements, or what fields are affected beyond the schema, offering minimal added 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?

The description is a single concise sentence plus the API endpoint. Every element is purposeful, with no redundancy or filler, making it highly scannable for an agent.

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?

Although the schema and annotations provide substantial detail, the description itself is minimal. It does not explain what fields can be updated (e.g., autoNotifyEnabled) or when to use this tool, leaving some reliance on the schema and sibling names for full context. It is minimally viable but not rich.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for the two parameters, including the nested body structure and the id field's origin. The tool description adds no additional parameter context, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('a build beta detail'), which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like get or list. The API path [PATCH /v1/buildBetaDetails/{id}] further reinforces the precise scope of the tool.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as builds__update or build_beta_details__get. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or selection criteria, leaving the agent without strategic context.

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