apple_update_device

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It merely states the action without revealing side effects (e.g., irreversibility, permission requirements, or whether the update is immediate). The agent lacks information about the tool's operational impact.

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, efficient sentence with no extraneous words. While it could be more informative, it is not verbose, earning a score of 4 for conciseness.

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 (3 parameters, no output schema) and lack of annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It does not explain required parameters, optionality, or any constraints (e.g., device must exist). The agent may miss critical context for correct invocation.

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?

Since input schema description coverage is 100%, the schema already describes each parameter's meaning (e.g., 'New device name', 'New status'). The description adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, meriting the baseline score of 3.

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 the resource 'device', and specifies the modifiable attributes ('name or status'). This distinguishes it from tools like 'apple_register_device' (create) and 'apple_list_devices' (read). However, it does not explicitly mention that only existing devices can be updated.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'apple_register_device' or 'apple_list_devices'. It does not mention prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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