linkedin_update_headline

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits but does not. It only states that the headline is updated, without mentioning potential side effects (e.g., overwriting current headline), authentication requirements, or reversibility. This is insufficient for a mutation tool with no annotation support.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose without extraneous information. It is appropriately sized for a simple, single-parameter tool.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is largely complete for understanding the basic operation. However, it lacks any behavioral context, such as confirmation or error handling, which would be expected for a profile-modifying action. Still sufficient for a straightforward update.

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?

The schema has 100% coverage with a parameter description 'Novo título/headline do perfil', which mirrors the tool description. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, but the schema fully explains the single parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Atualiza' (updates) with a clear resource 'título/headline do perfil do LinkedIn', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like linkedin_update_about or linkedin_update_current_position. It precisely identifies the target field being modified.

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, such as linkedin_update_about or linkedin_update_current_position. There are no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where another tool would be more appropriate. The usage is only implied by the tool's name and description.

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