common-update-item-referrer-by-path

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool updates or removes links, implying a mutation operation, but fails to mention critical details like required permissions, whether changes are reversible, potential side effects on linked items, or error handling. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior beyond basic functionality.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action. It avoids redundancy and wastes no words, though it could be slightly clearer in structure (e.g., separating the update and remove options more distinctly). Overall, it is appropriately concise for the tool's complexity.

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 mutation nature, 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral context (e.g., safety, permissions), output format, error cases, and differentiation from siblings. For a tool that modifies references across a database, this leaves the agent under-informed about critical operational aspects.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'path' and 'NewTarget' in context, but does not provide additional semantics, constraints, or examples beyond what the schema offers. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 tool's purpose: 'Updates all references to the specified item (by its path) to point to a new provided in the -NewTarget or removes links to the item.' It specifies the verb ('Updates'), resource ('references'), and scope ('all references'), but does not explicitly differentiate from its sibling 'common-update-item-referrer-by-id', which likely performs the same function but uses an ID instead of a path.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'common-update-item-referrer-by-id' or other referrer-related tools. It mentions the action but lacks context on prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name and parameters alone.

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