personal_upsert_entity

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

The description discloses an important behavioral trait: it reuses the existing id if the entity already exists, rather than creating a duplicate. However, with no annotations, it does not explain update behavior for optional fields like aliases or summary, side effects, or prerequisites.

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 short and front-loaded, which is good, but the parenthetical '(R3)' is an internal reference that adds no meaning for an AI agent. It is concise but includes an unexplained artifact that slightly reduces usefulness.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no parameter descriptions, the description leaves important gaps: field semantics, partial-update behavior, required type existence, and differentiation from merge/create tools. The output schema covers return values, but not these operational details.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the meaning or usage of any parameter: name, type, aliases, or summary. The mention of 'id' refers to an entity property, not an input parameter, so the agent gains almost no parameter-level insight.

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 uses a specific verb, 'Crea/actualiza', and names the resource, 'entidad', making the upsert purpose clear. It is distinguishable from read-oriented siblings like personal_find_entity, though it does not explicitly contrast with personal_merge.

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 given about when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as personal_merge or personal_create_type. The upsert semantics are implied by the description, but no exclusions or decision criteria are provided.

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