update_gig

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'update' (a write operation) but fails to disclose behavioral traits such as idempotency, authorization requirements, rate limits, or what happens to unspecified fields. The description also misleads by mentioning only three fields whereas the schema includes many more.

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, but it is too brief and omits important details. It sacrifices completeness for brevity, missing opportunities to add 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?

Given the complexity of 10 parameters and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It fails to explain return values, error conditions, or the full set of updatable fields, leaving significant gaps 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?

Only 20% of schema parameters have descriptions, and the tool description only adds meaning for title, description, and tags, ignoring other parameters like category, subcategory, packages, etc. The description does not compensate for the low schema 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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Update' and the resource 'existing Fiverr gig', listing specific fields (title, description, tags). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_gig or delete_gig.

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?

Description implies usage for updating a gig but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like needing the gig ID from list_gigs. The schema does reference list_gigs in gigId description, but the description itself lacks such context.

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