ezd_koszulka_update

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'update data' and offers no information about side effects, permissions, reversibility, ownership requirements, or response behavior, which is insufficient for a mutating operation.

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 short sentence with no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core action and resource.

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 mutating tool with no annotations, no output schema, and multiple closely related sibling tools, more context is needed: which fields identify the existing koszulka, how default owner parameters behave, whether this is the general update versus update_attributes, and what the operation returns. The current description leaves these 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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents each parameter and nested field. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond saying that existing koszulka data is updated, which is the baseline expected when the schema is complete.

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 states a specific action ('Zaktualizuj') and resource ('dane istniejace koszulki w systemie EZD PUW'), clearly indicating that this updates an existing koszulka rather than creating one. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling ezd_koszulka_update_attributes, which also sounds like an update operation.

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 word 'istniejace' implies this is for existing records rather than new ones, which loosely separates it from ezd_koszulka_create. There is no explicit statement about when to use this tool versus ezd_koszulka_update_attributes or any other sibling, so an agent gets little routing guidance.

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