update_mission

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

Discloses the merge semantic (fetches current version, omitted fields unchanged), which is key behavior. No annotations are provided, so description carries the burden. However, it omits error handling, idempotency, and permission requirements.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action, no redundancy. Every clause adds value.

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?

No output schema, 6 parameters with low schema coverage. The description explains merge behavior but lacks details on return values, validation rules, error conditions, or postconditions.

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 33% (only mission_id and waypoints have descriptions). The description adds no parameter-specific details beyond the merge behavior, failing to compensate for the low coverage.

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 an existing mission') and contrasts with create/duplicate by noting merge behavior and referencing list_missions for IDs.

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?

Suggests using list_missions to find IDs, but does not specify when to avoid this tool (e.g., for full replacement) or compare with siblings like create_mission or duplicate_mission.

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