jazz_update

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

Beyond annotations (which only mark not read-only, not idempotent, not destructive), the description adds that the operation uses 'privileged backend access' and 'wait[s] for configured durability,' and is disabled unless JAZZ_MCP_ALLOW_WRITES=true. This provides context not available in annotations.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the primary action, and no fluff. The additional clauses about privileges and enablement provide important context without excessive length.

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 description covers the core purpose, the need for privileged access, durability behavior, and the enablement condition. It lacks explicit return value details and a more detailed explanation of the values parameter, but the sibling tool set and schema context make it reasonably complete for a mutation tool.

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?

The schema has three required parameters (table, id, values) with no descriptions. The description only generally mentions 'update fields on one Jazz row,' implying table and id identify the row and values are the fields, but it does not explain the expected structure of the values object or any constraints. With 0% schema coverage, more explicit parameter mapping would be needed.

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 'Update fields on one Jazz row' – a specific verb (update) and resource (Jazz row). It differentiates from sibling tools like jazz_insert and jazz_delete by signaling modification of existing rows.

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 implies usage for modifying existing Jazz rows but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it. It mentions the prerequisite of JAZZ_MCP_ALLOW_WRITES=true and privileged access, but no direct comparison to siblings.

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