vn_update_tag

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

Annotations provide destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description does not elaborate on what destruction entails (e.g., overwriting fields) or idempotency guarantees. It adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, no filler. Every word earns its place.

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?

Despite destructiveHint=true, the description does not explain what happens on partial updates, default behavior, or return value. No output schema exists, so more context on side effects or response is needed.

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 low (25%, only id has a description). The description lists 'name, keywords, and/or pin state' which adds some meaning, but lacks details like format constraints (e.g., keyword length, name allowed characters). It partially compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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 tag's name, keywords, and/or pin state.' The verb 'Update' and resource 'tag' are specific and distinct from sibling tools like vn_create_tag or vn_delete_tag.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., no mention of vn_create_tag for creation or vn_bulk_tag_notes for bulk operations). The description does not include when-not-to-use or prerequisites.

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