update_service

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It does disclose that omitted fields are left unchanged and that content should be final/polished, but it does not mention side effects, validation behavior, permissions, or whether the updated service is returned.

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 concise and well-structured: two sentences cover the core purpose, partial-update semantics, and content quality expectations without unnecessary fluff.

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 description is sufficient for a simple update operation and no output schema is expected, but it does not address the relationship with sibling tools like update_questions or provide additional context about parameter constraints. Some operational context is missing.

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 description coverage is only 33%, and the description does not compensate by explaining key parameters like price, title, description, or durationMinutes. It only reiterates the partial-update behavior, leaving agents to infer meaning from property names.

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') and the resource ('an existing Topmate service'), distinguishing it from create/delete tools and from update_profile. The partial-update note reinforces that this is a targeted update tool.

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?

It provides useful usage guidance about partial updates and requiring polished content, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings like update_questions or create_service. The intended usage is somewhat implied rather than explicitly contrasted with alternatives.

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