swapcard_update_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Update' and provides no details on patch semantics, whether unspecified fields are cleared, permissions needed, ID format, or what happens if the document does not exist.

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. It conveys the core operation, resource type, and key parameter in an efficient manner.

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 output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain update behavior, optional-field handling, authorization expectations, or relationship to sibling document tools, leaving the agent without enough operational context.

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 must compensate, but it only mentions the ID. The semantics of url, name, and description are not explained, nor whether they represent partial updates or full replacements. The property names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds little beyond the schema.

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 action ('Update'), the resource ('community-level document'), the API version ('v2'), and the lookup method ('by its ID'). It also differentiates from siblings like swapcard_update_event_document by specifying 'community-level'.

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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. It does not mention when to prefer swapcard_update_event_document, swapcard_create_document, or any related document tools, nor does it state any exclusions.

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