update_tag

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly=false, idempotent=true, destructive=false. The description adds no behavioral context beyond stating 'patch selected fields', such as what happens on invalid patch fields or missing tag. No contradiction with annotations.

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 very short (one sentence), which is concise, but it sacrifices informativeness. It could be expanded slightly to cover parameters or behavior without losing brevity.

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 complexity (2 required params, nested object, output schema), the description omits key details like return value (updated tag), error cases, and distinction from bulk operations. It does not fully equip an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 0%, yet the description does not explain any parameters. It only says 'selected fields' without listing or describing the patch subfields (name, color, match, etc.) or the tag_id parameter. This forces reliance on the schema alone, which lacks descriptions.

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 ('patch') and resource ('tag'), indicating a partial update. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_tag and delete_tag, though it could be more explicit about the specific fields modifiable.

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 (e.g., bulk_edit_tags). There is no mention of prerequisites like tag existence, error handling, or context for using patch over other operations.

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