balena_update_tag

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

The description adds no behavioral information beyond what annotations already state. Annotations already show readOnlyHint=false, signaling mutation, but the description does not discuss side effects, permissions, immediacy of changes, or error conditions.

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 filler words. However, brevity is achieved at the cost of useful operational detail, so it is efficient but under-specified.

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 output schema and minimal annotation context, this description is incomplete. It omits how kind should be interpreted, where tag_id originates, and what a successful update returns, leaving an agent to guess at key invocation 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%, so the description carries the full burden of explaining parameters. It only implicitly maps 'tag value' to value and 'tag ID' to tag_id, leaving the intended meaning of the required kind enum and its relationship to tag_id unexplained.

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?

States a clear verb and object: 'Update a tag value by tag ID.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tag lifecycle tools like balena_create_tag, balena_delete_tag, and balena_list_tags, and from balena_update_variable by naming the target 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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that tag_id likely comes from balena_list_tags, nor does it contrast with create_tag or delete_tag. Usage context is only implied by the name and verb.

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