serpwatcher_update_annotation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'update' without specifying whether this is a partial or full update, what fields are required beyond the identified ones, or how the text is passed. This is inadequate for a mutation tool.

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 concise at one sentence, but it is under-specified and lacks structure. It is not bloated, but it fails to provide necessary context for a tool with nested objects and multiple parameters.

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 tool has a nested body parameter and no output schema, yet the description offers no explanation of how to construct the body, what fields are available for the annotation, or what the response will be. This is critically incomplete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, with all four parameters having descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics; it does not clarify that the annotation text likely goes in the 'body' parameter or what the 'query' parameter might do.

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) and resource (SERPWatcher annotation text), distinguishing it from sibling create/delete annotation tools. It is specific but does not elaborate on the full scope of what can be updated.

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 like serpwatcher_create_annotation or serpwatcher_delete_annotation. The verb 'update' implies the use case, but there is no explicit context or exclusions.

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