update_teacher_enrollment

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat these. However, it adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., side effects, permissions required, or whether partial updates are supported). The bar is lowered due to annotations, but the description adds no value beyond stating the action.

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, front-loaded, and contains zero waste. While it could be slightly more informative, it is appropriately concise for a simple update operation. It earns a high score for efficiency.

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 low complexity of this tool (4 params, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It tells the agent what the tool does, and the schema provides parameter details. However, it does not mention any return value or confirmation, leaving a small gap in completeness for an update operation.

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?

All four parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description does not need to explain them. It does not add any meaning beyond what the schema already provides, earning a baseline score of 3.

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 'Update a teacher enrollment' clearly identifies the verb (update) and resource (teacher enrollment), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_teacher_enrollment and delete_teacher_enrollment. However, it does not specify which fields can be updated, which is a minor gap in clarity.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create or delete teacher enrollment). It does not mention prerequisites, constraints, or context that would help an agent decide to invoke it over siblings.

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