Update a JsonFabrica generator function weight (admin)

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

Without annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden, and it does disclose the HTTP method, exact endpoint, auth role requirement, and the 403 error case. It does not describe success response or side effects beyond 'update', but the admin/403 detail is meaningful and non-obvious.

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 short sentences with no filler; the endpoint and auth constraint are front-loaded. Every clause earns its place.

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 two-parameter PATCH with no output schema and no annotations, the description is serviceable: it pins down the resource, method, and auth. It omits the response shape and any detail about valid weight values, and does not point to list_function_weights as a way to discover function names, so an agent is left to infer these.

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 provide meaning. functionName is inferable from the path template, but the description never explains what weight represents, its allowed range, or how it affects generation. An agent cannot tell whether weight is a ratio, percentage, or arbitrary multiplier.

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 states a concrete verb and resource: it calls PATCH on /v1/admin/function-weights/{functionName}, which unambiguously conveys an update operation. It is clearly distinct from the sibling list_function_weights because the method and endpoint indicate mutation rather than listing. The title's '(admin)' is reinforced by the description.

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 a clear prerequisite: the API key must have role=admin, and it names the failure mode (403) if not. However, it never states when to prefer this over related tools such as list_function_weights, nor does it explicitly exclude non-admin use beyond the implied auth requirement.

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