update_dhcp_custom_option

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no behavioral context beyond restating the purpose, such as whether it performs partial updates, how apply_immediately affects changes, or any 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, clear sentence with no redundant words. It is concise and front-loaded with the key information.

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 are rich, the description is minimal. It fails to explain important usage context such as the default behavior of apply_immediately (true) and whether an explicit apply_dhcp_changes call is needed after updating. For an update tool with this complexity, more context is needed.

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 provides descriptions for all 5 parameters (100% coverage), including option_id referencing search_dhcp_custom_options. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Update' and resource 'DHCP custom option' with identifier 'by ID', making the tool's purpose clear. It also distinguishes from sibling tools create/delete/search for DHCP custom options.

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 alternatives like create or delete. It also does not mention prerequisites such as obtaining an existing option_id from search_dhcp_custom_options, or whether apply_dhcp_changes needs to be called afterwards.

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