sharing_providers_update

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

The description mentions the HTTP method PATCH, which implies partial update semantics. However, it does not disclose side effects, authorization needs, or return value details. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description adds the endpoint but not much beyond that.

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 very concise with a single sentence and the endpoint. It is front-loaded with the action and has no wasted words.

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 update tool with rich schema and annotations, the description is adequate but not comprehensive. It does not explain return values (despite an output schema existing) and could provide more context about partial updates.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no further parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides; it only repeats the body field's description.

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 'Update a Delta Sharing provider' with the specific PATCH endpoint, providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes the tool from sibling CRUD operations like create, delete, and get.

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 updating a provider but offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus create or delete, nor any prerequisites or conditions.

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