trigger_update

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds that updates modify properties and encourages partial updates, but does not disclose potential side effects, permission requirements, or failure modes. Adds some value beyond annotations but not rich.

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?

Two concise sentences plus a clear usage tip. Every sentence earns its place: first states the purpose, second adds behavioral context (only specify changes). No fluff, front-loaded.

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 presence of an output schema and 100% parameter coverage, the description is adequate but leaves gaps: no mention of error conditions (e.g., invalid triggerid), atomicity, or whether changes are immediately applied. Missing context about idempotency (annotation says false) but not explained.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description lists the changeable fields (description, expression, priority, status, comments) but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema descriptions already provide. No additional constraints or format hints are given.

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 verb 'Update' and resource 'trigger in Zabbix', and lists the modifiable properties (description, expression, priority, status, comments). It distinguishes from siblings like trigger_create or trigger_delete, but does not explicitly state the scope or constraints like the high-calibration example.

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 versus alternatives (e.g., trigger_create, trigger_delete). The phrase 'Only specify fields you want to change' is a parameter usage hint, not a contextual decision rule. Lacks when-not-to-use or alternative tool references.

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