update_sub_agent

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'update existing' but does not indicate whether updates are partial, how missing IDs are handled, any validation, or side effects. The mutation nature is implied but not detailed.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise, though it offers minimal information. It earns a high score for structure but not for content.

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?

The tool has a nested 'updates' object with seven properties, no output schema, and no annotations. The description does not explain the configuration semantics, return behavior, or error conditions, making it incomplete for a tool of this complexity.

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 only 50% (id is described, updates is not). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the parameter names. It does not clarify what fields in the 'updates' object do or that it represents a partial update, leaving the nested object semantics under-specified.

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 'Update' with the resource 'existing sub-agent configuration', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'add_sub_agent' (create). It names exactly what the tool operates on.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is for modifying an existing sub-agent rather than creating one, nor does it reference related tools such as 'add_sub_agent' or 'update_agent_prompt_templates'.

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