Update a VWO campaign goal

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds context by explaining that changing goals affects reported results and can invalidate conclusions, which goes beyond the annotation alone.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose and adding a critical behavioral warning. Every word 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?

The description covers the mutation's impact but does not describe the return value or response format. Given no output schema, this omission leaves the agent uncertain about what to expect after a successful update.

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%, so baseline is 3. However, the description adds value for the 'body' parameter by noting that VWO does not publish a schema and the object is sent as-is, and provides guidance for accountId vs workspaceName. This extra context justifies a higher score.

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 ('Change an existing goal on a VWO campaign') and specifies the resource ('an existing goal on a VWO campaign'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like vwo_new_campaign_goal and vwo_delete_campaign_goal.

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 explains the impact of changing a goal on a running campaign, which guides when to use caution. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives like vwo_new_campaign_goal or explain when updating vs creating is appropriate.

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