sophos_update_software_comment

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by noting it is a 'full replace with PUT', clarifying that the operation overwrites the entire comment. Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive nature (destructiveHint=false). The description confirms and elaborates on this.

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. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Set or update' and specifies the resource and method, with no wasted words.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not explain return values or potential errors. Given the simplicity of the operation, this is adequate but could be improved by mentioning the response (e.g., updated comment object).

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 schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description mentions 'user comment', which aligns with the 'comment' parameter, but does not provide additional semantics beyond the schema.

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 ('Set or update the user comment'), the resource ('static software package'), and the method ('full replace with PUT'). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like sophos_get_software_comment and sophos_list_software_comments.

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 by specifying the PUT method and full replace behavior, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like sophos_add_software_package or sophos_get_software_comment. No exclusion or contextual guidance is provided.

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