update_password

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

The description discloses important side effects beyond annotations, including that customFields is fully replaced, hidden/favorite state is preserved, tags are untouched and uneditable, and the server rejects writes if the entry changed underneath. This is transparent about destructive behavior and complements destructiveHint: true.

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 and front-loaded, stating the purpose first and then adding necessary caveats in a compact manner. No unnecessary words or redundant restatements appear.

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?

For a tool with no output schema, the description provides the key operational context: partial update behavior, customFields replacement, tags limitation, required field constraint, and optimistic concurrency rejection. This is sufficient for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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 only 30%, and while the prose clarifies update semantics and customFields behavior, several individual parameters like url, label, notes, folder, password, username, and favorite lack explicit format or meaning. In particular, folder is ambiguous (ID vs name) and no validation details are given for most fields.

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 tool updates fields of an existing password by id, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_password, delete_password, restore_password, and search/get variants.

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?

The description gives explicit usage guidance: only passed fields are changed, other fields are preserved, customFields replaces the entire set, tags cannot be edited, and at least one field besides id must be provided. It also notes concurrency rejection, which helps the agent decide when and how to invoke the tool safely.

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