apidog_update

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 discloses key behaviors: partial import, single endpoint scope, and no impact on other endpoints. However, it does not mention whether the endpoint must already exist, how merging works, authentication requirements, or response behavior.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and scope. Every word earns its place; no waste or redundancy.

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's moderate complexity (5 params, nested object, no output schema) and no annotations, the description is adequate but has gaps. It clarifies scope and side effects but does not address whether the endpoint must pre-exist, merge semantics, or return value. These would be helpful for safe invocation.

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 100%, so all parameters are already documented. The description adds little beyond the schema, only reinforcing that the operation is a partial spec. It does not provide additional semantic details about parameter usage beyond what the schema already states.

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 endpoint via targeted partial spec import, using a specific verb+resource. It explicitly distinguishes from bulk updates and other endpoint operations by noting it does not affect other endpoints.

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 provides clear context for use: targeted updates to a single endpoint without affecting others. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, such as for bulk updates or full spec imports.

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