update_inspection_config

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden but only states it 'updates' and that format varies by type. No details on mutation behavior, authentication needs, or 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?

Description is concise but contains redundancy in first two sentences. Could be consolidated. Otherwise well-structured.

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?

Despite having an output schema, description lacks important details like whether config is merged or replaced, validation constraints, and prerequisites. Not fully complete for a mutation tool.

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 coverage is 0%, but description provides meaningful explanations for all four parameters (e.g., app_id format, inspection_type examples, config variability). Adds value beyond schema titles.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'update' and resource 'inspection configuration for an application'. Differentiates from sibling tools like 'get_inspection_config' and other update tools.

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 explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives. Does not mention when not to use or prerequisites.

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