Update Meta Pixel

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description aligns with these ('Updates') but adds no additional behavioral context beyond what annotations provide.

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 concise with a one-line summary followed by an Args list. It is well-structured and uses minimal text, though the main sentence could be more descriptive.

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?

With no output schema and only 17% schema coverage, the description fails to explain return values, error handling, or effects of the update. It leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to infer correct usage.

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 only 17%, but the description mainly restates parameter names and enum values already present in the schema. It adds example values for automatic_matching_fields but does not explain parameter semantics beyond repetition.

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 'Updates pixel settings' as a verb+resource pair. It distinguishes from sibling tools like meta_create_pixel or meta_get_pixel, but does not explicitly differentiate among other update tools in the sibling list.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., meta_create_pixel for creating, meta_get_pixel for reading). No context or prerequisites are provided.

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