lead_labels_update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only says 'update' which implies a write operation, but does not disclose potential side effects, required permissions, or whether changes are reversible. For a mutation tool, more transparency is needed.

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 with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, then provides parameter guidance. Every sentence 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 parameters, no nested objects, no output schema), the description provides the minimal necessary information to invoke it. However, it does not explain what the tool returns or any post-update behavior, which could be important for an agent without annotations or output schema.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value by reiterating 'label UUID' and 'any combination of name/color', but this largely repeats what the schema already provides. No extra clarification on parameter formats or constraints beyond the schema.

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 ('update') and the resource ('lead label'), using a specific verb and noun. It is distinct from sibling tools like 'lead_labels_create' and 'lead_labels_delete'.

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 tells the agent to provide the label's UUID and any combination of name/color to change. This implies the correct usage scenario but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., using create for new labels).

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