update_generation_step

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It only mentions the stability requirement for references but does not disclose side effects, error conditions, permissions, or mutation behavior expected for an update tool.

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?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words. The main action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds essential constraint on parameter types.

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 the tool has 5 parameters, 3 required, and no annotations, the description leaves gaps: status values are undefined, plan_id/step_id roles unstated, and error handling missing. The presence of an output schema slightly mitigates but does not compensate fully.

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 description partially explains input_refs and output_refs (stable GUID handles) but provides no explanation for the required parameters status, plan_id, and step_id. With 0% schema description coverage, this is insufficient.

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 ('Advances a generation step') and the precondition ('after its dependencies complete'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_generation_plan or get_generation_plan.

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 specifies when to use the tool (after dependencies complete) but does not explicitly mention alternatives 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.