system_interface_update

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

The description notes that only specified fields are changed (partial update) and implies the interface must exist. However, it lacks details on side effects, permissions, error conditions, or required interface state. With no annotations, more transparency would be beneficial.

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, front-loaded with the action and resource, with no unnecessary words.

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 has 8 parameters (1 required) and an output schema, the description adequately covers the update operation. It could mention that the interface must exist or what happens on failure, but overall it is sufficient.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 8 parameters. The description adds 'only specified fields are changed' but does not elaborate on individual parameters beyond the schema. 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 clearly states 'Update an existing network interface', specifying the verb and resource, and adds 'only specified fields are changed' to indicate partial update. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create, delete, get, 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?

The description implies usage for modifying an existing interface but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions. Context from sibling tools provides some guidance.

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