sophos_update_case

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

Annotations indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) but not destructive. The description merely lists updatable fields without revealing behavioral details like whether all fields must be supplied or only changed ones, or any side effects. The description adds little beyond the 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 a single concise sentence that lists the key updatable fields without wasted words. While it is effective, it could benefit from structural elements (e.g., bullet points) to improve readability for an AI agent.

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 lacks information about required parameters (tenant_id, case_id), optional behavior, return value (no output schema), and error conditions. For a tool with 8 parameters and related sibling tools, this completeness is insufficient.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter having a description in the input schema. The description's parenthetical list of field names adds marginal value beyond the schema, as it does not explain parameter interactions, constraints, or usage patterns. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 updates an existing case and lists the specific fields (name, type, severity, status, assignee, overview). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like sophos_create_case and sophos_get_case by focusing on update functionality.

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 such as sophos_create_case or sophos_get_case. There are no mentions of prerequisites (e.g., case must exist) or scenarios where this tool should not be used (e.g., closed cases).

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