apps_manifest_update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. However, it only says 'Update', lacking details on mutation effects, permissions required, or idempotency. The description's behavioral information is minimal.

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 a single sentence, concise and direct. However, it could include more context without becoming overly verbose. It achieves efficiency but at the cost of completeness.

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 has 2 required parameters, no schema descriptions, and no annotations, the description is too thin. It lacks information on success/error behavior, prerequisites, or example usage, making it incomplete for effective agent use.

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%, so the description should clarify parameter meanings. It adds 'from an app manifest' but does not explain what 'manifest' is (e.g., JSON string, file path) or the format of app_id. The output schema exists but is not used to compensate.

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 'Update an app from an app manifest' clearly specifies the verb (update) and resource (app from manifest), distinguishing it from sibling tools like apps_manifest_create or apps_manifest_delete.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like apps_manifest_create or apps_manifest_validate. There are no inclusion or exclusion criteria stated.

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