remote-config-update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Updates', implying a mutation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as permissions required, whether changes are reversible, rate limits, or what the response looks like. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with complex parameters.

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 sentence with zero waste, making it appropriately sized and front-loaded. However, it's overly concise to the point of under-specification, slightly reducing effectiveness.

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?

Given the complexity (2 parameters with nested objects), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to provide necessary context for safe and effective use, such as error handling or return values, making it insufficient for this tool's requirements.

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 50%, with detailed descriptions for nested parameters but not for top-level ones. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, as it doesn't explain parameters like 'remoteConfigId' or 'body'. However, the schema provides some context, so baseline 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 'Updates remote config's content' states the action (updates) and resource (remote config's content), but it's vague about what 'content' specifically means. It doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'remote-config-update-description' or 'remote-config-update-user-identifier-criteria', leaving ambiguity about scope.

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. With siblings like 'remote-config-create' and 'remote-config-update-description', the description lacks any indication of prerequisites, context, or exclusions for usage.

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