updateMock

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, which are consistent with an update operation. The description adds behavioral context by explaining how to set or deactivate a server response via config.serverResponseId, but does not discuss permissions or potential side effects beyond what annotations imply.

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 brief and well-structured, with a clear main statement followed by bullet points. Every sentence adds essential information without redundancy.

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?

For a tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description covers the essential usage and activation details. It assumes familiarity with the resource model but provides sufficient guidance for correct invocation. Minor improvement could include mentioning return value or error cases, but it is generally complete.

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?

The input schema provides descriptions for all parameters, but the description enhances understanding by highlighting the key modifiable fields and explaining the activation mechanism for serverResponseId. This adds practical value beyond the schema definitions.

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 starts with 'Updates a mock server.' which clearly states the action and resource. It then lists specific mutable attributes (name, environment, privacy, default server response), distinguishing it from sibling tools like createMock or getMock.

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 provides clear usage context by explaining what can be changed and includes a specific example for activating/deactivating a server response. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, but given the sibling list, the purpose is sufficiently clear.

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