Update Program Options

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

The description adds valuable behavior beyond the annotations: fields omitted are untouched, arrays replace wholesale, and only provided fields under 'fields' are changed. This is critical for a tool marked destructiveHint=true because it tells the agent exactly where the destructive risk lies and how to avoid unintended data loss.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the core action in the first sentence and the most important semantic caveats (partial update, array replacement) immediately after. Every sentence adds information needed for correct invocation, with no filler or repetition.

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 two-parameter update tool with an output schema and annotations, the description covers all essential operational context: what the tool updates, how partial updates behave, the danger of array replacement, how to discover the full object, and the target campaign resolution. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it safely is missing.

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 description substantially enriches the schema. It clarifies that the 'fields' object is a partial patch, not a full replacement, and explains the campaignId default behavior with GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID. This goes well beyond the bare schema where 'fields' is just an object with additionalProperties and campaignId lacks operational context.

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 verb ('Update') with a specific resource ('the Options tab configuration for your GrowSurf program'), which clearly distinguishes it from fetch operations like growsurf_get_campaign_options and from other update tools like growsurf_update_campaign. It also immediately explains the partial-update model, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 gives clear context: it should be used when updating the Options tab, and it recommends fetching the current tab first to see the full object before sending changes. It does not explicitly name 'growsurf_get_campaign_options' as the fetch alternative, but 'fetch the tab first' conveys the intended workflow without needing a formal exclusion list.

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