update_release

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

The description adds useful context beyond the annotations by stating that only supplied fields are changed while omitted ones remain unchanged. This disambiguates patch-style behavior from full replacement and complements the existing readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations without contradicting them.

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 short, purposeful sentences. The first states the core capability and partial-update behavior; the second gives a practical prerequisite. There is no filler or unnecessary repetition.

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 definition is strong for an update operation: it covers the action, the patch semantics, and the preliminary get_release recommended. It does not describe possible errors or return behavior, but with no output schema and a fully documented input schema, these omissions are acceptable gaps.

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 coverage is complete for individual fields, but the description contributes an important cross-parameter behavior: omitted fields are preserved. This meaningfully informs how the agent should construct the request and is not fully explicit in the input schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Update release metadata.' It clearly distinguishes this from create_release, delete_release, and get_release, and the following sentence clarifies that it is a partial update rather than a full replacement.

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 tells the agent to fetch current values first with get_release, preventing accidental overwrites. It does not explicitly discuss conditions for creating a new release vs. updating an existing one, but the guidance provided is concrete and actionable.

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