test_update_database

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Update database properties' without indicating whether the update is destructive, what side effects occur, or any permissions needed.

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 very concise (one sentence) and front-loaded, but it sacrifices completeness. It is not overly verbose, but could be slightly expanded to provide meaningful guidance without becoming too long.

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 5 parameters, is a mutation, and lacks annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not cover usage context, parameter formats, or behavioral expectations, making it insufficient 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 coverage is 0%, yet the description adds no parameter-level details. The parameters like title_json and properties_json are not explained in terms of expected format or constraints, forcing the agent to rely on the schema alone.

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 tool updates database properties, and the name specifies it's the test variant. It distinguishes from siblings like test_update_page or test_update_block by targeting a different resource.

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 its default counterpart or alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as requiring a database_id, or situations where this tool should be avoided.

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