updateAirtableRecord

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses a key behavior: only the specified fields are updated (partial update) and targets an existing record. However, it does not mention return values, error handling, or whether the record must exist, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 that front-loads the action and includes essential scope. No unnecessary words or repetition, earning a perfect score.

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 simple CRUD update with a complete schema (100% coverage) and no output schema, the description provides adequate context. It specifies the partial-update behavior and the requirement of an existing record. The tool is well-understood without needing extra detail on response formats or prerequisites.

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% with all four parameters documented, including an example for the fields object. The description adds minimal parameter meaning beyond the schema (only 'specified fields' echoes the fields parameter), so the 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 clearly states the action (Updates), the resource (existing record in the given table), and the scope (specified fields). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like createAirtableRecord and listAirtableRecords, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 implies usage for modifying an existing record, but it does not explicitly contrast with createAirtableRecord or mention when NOT to use it. No alternatives or prerequisites are given, so the guidance is purely implicit.

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