Update Client

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly reveals that the stored client is fully replaced, that omitted fields are cleared, and that a prior read is necessary—non-obvious and potentially destructive behaviors that an agent must know.

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 compact and front-loaded: the purpose appears first, followed by the critical caveats about replacement and clearing. Every sentence earns its place, with no repetition of schema details or filler.

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 full parameter schema coverage and an output schema, the description supplies the essential missing context: the read-modify-write workflow and the destructive clearing behavior. An agent has enough information to invoke update_client correctly and avoid data loss.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining that the client parameter must be the complete resource and that missing fields are cleared, which clarifies intent that the schema alone does not fully convey.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Update a client in a workspace.' The description goes beyond a simple label by explaining the replacement semantics and referencing get_client, which distinguishes this tool from the sibling create_client, delete_client, and revert_client tools.

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?

Provides concrete guidance: read with get_client first and send the whole client back with edits. It clearly orients the agent to the correct workflow, though it does not explicitly state exclusions such as 'use create_client for new clients.'

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