swapcard_update_exhibitor

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'update' implying mutation, but doesn't disclose whether it's a partial or full update, whether unspecified fields are reset, or any permission requirements. It also doesn't mention what happens if the exhibitor doesn't 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 sentence, concise and front-loaded with the main action. However, it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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 8 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain the update semantics, the meaning of the features object, or any constraints. The tool is moderately complex, and the description leaves too much to inference.

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%, and the description only mentions 'features and background image' but doesn't explain the other parameters like name, logoUrl, websiteUrl, description. The nested 'features' object is not explained. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema's property names.

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 a single exhibitor's details, including features and background image. It distinguishes from siblings like swapcard_upsert_exhibitors (which likely creates or updates in bulk) and swapcard_delete_exhibitors, but doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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 like swapcard_upsert_exhibitors or swapcard_list_exhibitors. The description implies it's for updating an existing exhibitor, but doesn't state prerequisites (e.g., exhibitor must exist) or when not to use it.

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