update_runner

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only mentions the HTTP method and a preference for paused over active, but fails to explain side effects, permissions, or how unspecified parameters are handled (e.g., whether they remain unchanged or are reset to defaults).

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 extremely short and front-loaded with the core action, which is concise. However, it is under-specified to the point of missing critical information, making the brevity more of a deficiency than a strength.

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 tool's complexity (10 parameters, no annotations) and minimal description, the description is far from complete. While an output schema exists, the description fails to clarify the parameters or usage context, leaving the agent with little more than the tool's name.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not compensate by explaining any of the 10 parameters. It only says 'runner settings' generically, offering no insight into what each field controls or how they relate.

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: 'Update runner settings' with the HTTP method PUT and endpoint '/runners/:id'. This specific verb-resource pair distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_runner, delete_runner, and token reset operations.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only behavioral hint, 'Prefer paused over active,' is about parameter values, not tool selection or contextual use cases.

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