update_meeting_location

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. The description only says 'Update,' which is consistent but adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., permissions, side effects, or response behavior). With annotations present, the description should add value but fails to do so.

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 sentence of four words, extremely concise and front-loaded. While it lacks structure (e.g., no use cases or examples), it efficiently communicates the core purpose without extraneous text.

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 complexity (5 parameters, nested address object, no output schema), the description is too minimal. It omits critical context such as return values, required permissions, or how updates behave (e.g., partial vs. full replacement). This makes the tool less usable for an AI agent.

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 80% (4 out of 5 top-level parameters have descriptions, including nested address_attributes). The description itself adds no parameter information, but the schema is sufficiently detailed, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Update a meeting location,' which specifies the action and resource. However, it does not differentiate among sibling tools like 'create_meeting_location' or 'delete_meeting_location,' so the purpose is clear but lacks sibling distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when a meeting location should be updated rather than created or deleted. The description offers no context or exclusion criteria.

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