update_client

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

The description omits critical behavioral traits: it does not disclose whether updates are partial or full replacements, required permissions, side effects, or idempotency. With no annotations, the burden falls on the description, which fails to inform.

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, which is concise but lacks structure. It does not front-load key details, and its brevity sacrifices necessary information for a mutation tool with complex parameters.

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 complexity (3 required parameters, nested object, no output schema), the description fails to explain return values, update semantics, or constraints. It is incomplete for effective use.

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 parameters are documented. However, the description adds no meaning beyond the schema—for example, client_data is an object but its structure and required fields are not clarified. Baseline of 3 applies.

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 a client,' which is specific and identifies the resource. However, among many sibling tools like update_client_role and update_client_scope, it does not differentiate the scope of this tool (the top-level client object).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With numerous update tools for client-related entities, agents lack direction on context or prerequisites.

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