update_data_validation

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool updates existing rules, but does not clarify partial update behavior, error conditions for missing rules, permissions needed, or what happens to unspecified optional parameters. This is insufficient for an 8-parameter mutation tool.

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 sentence of 6 words, which is efficient but lacks detail. It conveys the core purpose but does not earn its place given the tool's complexity. Concise but under-specified.

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 tool has 8 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and includes siblings. The description does not explain update behavior, partial updates, or return values. It is insufficiently complete for an agent to use effectively without guessing.

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 schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning about parameter interactions or update semantics (e.g., whether omitting optional parameters leaves them unchanged). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Update' and clearly identifies the resource as 'existing data validation rules in a cell range'. It effectively distinguishes from siblings like 'add_data_validation' and 'remove_data_validation'.

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 implies usage for modifying existing validation rules, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (add, remove, list). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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