update_data

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a mutating operation, but does not clarify whether it creates a key if absent, how it interacts with existing TTL, or what response is returned. Significant gaps remain for a write operation.

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, concise sentence with no redundant wording. It front-loads the primary action and resource, achieving high efficiency at the cost of detail that other dimensions evaluate.

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?

As a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It fails to explain edge cases (e.g., updating a non-existent key), TTL semantics, or return behavior, making it inadequate for an agent to fully anticipate the tool's runtime behavior.

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 input schema already describes all three parameters (key, value, ttl) with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage but does not enhance understanding.

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 existing data') and the resource ('a key in Redis'), giving a specific verb and object. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'set_data', which may perform a similar operation, so it lacks explicit differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'set_data', 'create_key', or 'delete_data'. The description gives no context about preconditions (e.g., key must exist) or scenarios that favor this tool, so usage is ambiguous.

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