tdarr_log_job_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Update' implies mutation, but no details are given about side effects, required state, permissions, or reversibility. This is insufficient 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 very short (one sentence), but it lacks substance. While it is concise, it is under-informative, reducing its value. It does not waste words, but it also fails to provide necessary detail.

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 simplicity of the tool (3 parameters, no output schema), the description should at least clarify what a 'job report' is and what 'update' does in context. It does not, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 coverage is 100% (all three parameters documented in schema), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's descriptions (job object, timestamp, report text).

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 job report' states a verb and resource, but it is vague and does not differentiate from sibling tools like tdarr_search_job_reports or tdarr_delete_job_report. It lacks specificity about what updating entails.

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. There are multiple sibling tools for managing job reports (search, read, delete), but the description offers no context or exclusions.

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