update_karyawan

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that fields with value None are not changed, which is important behavioral information. However, it does not mention other aspects like authorization requirements or return behavior.

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 only two sentences, concise and front-loaded with the core action and key behavioral note. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The description covers the core behavior (update by id, None fields unchanged) but lacks detail on parameter usage, return values, or prerequisites. Given 6 parameters and an output schema exists (unseen), more context could improve completeness for an AI agent.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It only explains the id parameter implicitly and the behavior for None fields. For 6 parameters, this is insufficient to clarify the semantics of nama, email, status, jabatan, and departemen beyond their names.

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 action 'Perbarui' (update), the resource 'data karyawan' (employee data), and the key identifier 'berdasarkan id' (by id). It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like create, list, get, and delete.

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 implies when to use the tool (to update employee data by id) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives. Sibling tools are listed but not referenced, offering no guidance on selection.

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