kql_database_update

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the operation's safety profile is known. The description adds that the updatable fields are name and description, which is useful, but it does not disclose partial-update semantics, permission needs, or response behavior. It is not contradictory to the annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and affected fields without filler. It is easy to scan and appropriately sized for a simple update 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?

For a straightforward metadata update with full schema coverage and safety annotations, the description is mostly sufficient. However, it omits guidance on partial updates and does not explicitly distinguish this tool from kql_database_update_definition, leaving some context for the agent to infer.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all four parameters. The description only adds a synonym ('name' for displayName) and otherwise repeats what the schema already communicates, so 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 ('Update') and resource ('KQL database'), and narrows the scope to 'name or description'. This distinguishes it from the sibling kql_database_update_definition, which targets the underlying definition rather than simple metadata fields.

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 it—when changing a KQL database's name or description—but gives no explicit guidance about alternatives or exclusions. With kql_database_update_definition as a nearby sibling, explicit routing would help, so this is minimally adequate.

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