orion_update_attributes

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and non-destructive, so the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond stating 'update'. It does not elaborate on side effects, authorization needs, or behavior when updating partial attributes.

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 and front-loaded with purpose. The docstring-style listing of arguments is efficient, though slightly verbose with 'Args:' prefix. No wasted sentences.

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 presence of output schema (implied), return values are covered. However, the description misses important details like validation rules, error conditions, or the fact that attributes parameter uses additionalProperties (any key allowed). The tool is simple but could benefit from a note about not removing unspecified attributes.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the attributes parameter with a concrete example showing the nested structure. The entity_id is self-explanatory. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states 'update one or more attributes of an existing entity' providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create and delete by focusing on attribute mutation.

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?

Description implies usage for updating attributes on an existing entity but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like orion_create_entity or orion_get_entity. No exclusion criteria or context are provided.

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