update_character_sheet

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

With no annotations, the description effectively discloses key behaviors: mutation (patch), merge vs replace semantics for attributes, validation of invariants, and atomic rollback on error ('state is left unchanged'). This goes beyond mere purpose and aids safe invocation.

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?

Three concise sentences deliver essential information without redundancy: action, merge/replace semantics, and error behavior. Every sentence earns its place, and the description is front-loaded with the core verb.

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 of a free-form patch object and existence of an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It clarifies merge behavior for three key sub-dicts but could be improved by listing supported fields or describing invariants. Still, it provides enough context for effective use.

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 single parameter 'changes' is an open object with schema coverage 0%. The description compensates by explaining the expected structure: top-level scalars/lists replaced, sub-dicts (skill/stamina/luck) merged. This adds meaningful guidance beyond the schema's 'additionalProperties: true'.

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 patches a character sheet, with specific verb 'Patch' and resource 'character sheet'. It further distinguishes from siblings like 'create_character' and 'read_character_sheet' by detailing the merge behavior for sub-dicts (skill/stamina/luck) and replacement for scalars/lists.

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 usage for partial updates but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_character' or 'archive_character'. No direct comparisons or exclusion criteria are provided, leaving the agent to infer context.

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