Update AM Script

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that it updates existing scripts and allows any combination of name, description, or script content, which gives useful behavioral context beyond the annotations and does not contradict them.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy for an agent to quickly understand the purpose.

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 presence of annotations, a partial update operation, and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool does. It specifies the resource type and what can be updated. A minor gap is the lack of mention about response, but annotations cover idempotency and safety.

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% with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds the phrase 'any combination,' reinforcing the optional nature of name, description, and script, but the schema already shows they are not required. The description provides minimal additional meaning 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 an existing Scripted Decision Node script') and specifies the resource (script). It distinguishes from siblings like createScript, deleteScript, and getAMScript by focusing on modification of an existing entity.

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 when to use (to modify an existing script) and indicates partial updates. While it does not explicitly exclude alternatives, the sibling tool names provide context, and the title 'Update AM Script' contrasts with create/delete/get scripts.

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