update_service

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states 'Update a service object.' without disclosing behavior like whether updates are partial/full, idempotency, or side effects. The return format is specified but insufficient for a mutation tool.

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?

Concise, front-loaded with purpose, and structured with Args/Returns sections. Every sentence is informative 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?

Covers return values via output schema mention and descriptions, but lacks context on side effects, error cases, or prerequisites. Adequate for a simple update tool but could be more complete.

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 0%, so the description adds value by explaining each parameter's purpose (e.g., 'New TCP port range'), but lacks format details (e.g., '80-443' or comma-separated). Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 'Update a service object.' with specific updatable fields (tcp_portrange, udp_portrange, comment), distinguishing it from sibling tools like update_address or delete_service.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_service, delete_service) or prerequisites. The description only states what it does, not when to use it.

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