update_device

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing. It does not say what 'device configuration' covers, what happens to settings not included in the payload, whether the operation is destructive or reversible, or what permissions are required.

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?

It is a single short sentence, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. Nothing is front-loaded because nothing of substance is communicated.

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?

A mutation tool taking an opaque nested object with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter documentation is completely inadequate. Neither the schema nor the description tells the agent what a valid call looks like or what it will affect.

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 single parameter 'conf' is a free-form nested object with 0% schema description coverage and no defined properties. The description gives no hint of the object's expected keys or shape, so an agent cannot construct a valid call from the available information.

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 restates the tool name almost verbatim: 'update_device' -> 'Update device configuration'. It names no specific configuration area (hosts, password, swap) and does not distinguish itself from the many sibling update_device_* tools, several of which also update device configuration.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus update_device_by_file, update_device_hosts, update_device_password, or update_device_swap, all of which overlap. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated; the agent must guess which device-update entry point applies.

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