Update Context

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is non-readOnly, non-destructive, and idempotent. The description adds that updates can be partial ('name and/or value'), which is useful beyond the schema, but it does not disclose behavior for missing context IDs, error responses, or side effects beyond what annotations cover.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the action, the target, and the key parameters. Every word earns its place with no unnecessary detail or repetition.

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 simple update tool with a fully documented schema and safety-related annotations, the description is mostly complete. It could mention that the context must already exist or how to obtain the context_id, but these are implied by the 'by id' phrasing and the required parameter, so the gap is minor.

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% and each parameter is already described. The description adds a bit of semantic grouping by showing that 'name' and 'value' are the updatable fields and that they can be used in combination ('and/or'), but this largely mirrors the schema's optional field indications.

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' with the resource 'context' and the specific fields affected ('name and/or value') plus the lookup key ('by id'). This distinguishes it from sibling context tools (create, get, list, delete) and makes the tool's sole purpose unambiguous.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus create or delete, nor any prerequisite that the context must already exist. The description merely states what it does, leaving the agent to infer that it is for modifying an existing context based on the tool's name and siblings.

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