update_series_by_id

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

Annotations already declare this as non-read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the HTTP PUT method and advises reading GET/schema first to discover expected fields, which is useful context, but it does not disclose side effects or the meaning of move_files.

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 short, front-loaded with the operation and endpoint, and organized into an Args list. It avoids fluff, though the per-parameter annotations like 'Path parameter' and 'Query parameter' add little informational value.

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?

For a simple 3-parameter update with an output schema and safety-related annotations, the description is minimally adequate: it identifies the resource, the method, and points to GET/schema for body shape. However, move_files remains opaque, and there is no context about when this tool is the right choice among many sibling update tools.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it mostly restates what the schema already shows: id is a path parameter, body is a payload, move_files is a query parameter. It gives a useful discovery strategy for body fields but leaves move_files semantically unexplained.

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 operation ('Update Series') and pinpoints the resource via the PUT endpoint. It is specific enough to be distinguished from unrelated siblings, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from other update_*_by_id tools without relying on the name.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_series_editor or bulk update tools. The only practical guidance is 'Read the matching GET or the /schema endpoint first,' which addresses how to prepare the body but not when to choose this tool over siblings.

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