update-tag

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

Discloses critical behaviors beyond annotations: replacing resources is not atomic and can leave partial state if failed; behavior of omitting resources vs sending empty array. No contradictions with annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true).

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded, critical details follow efficiently. Every sentence adds 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 4-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, behavioral nuances, parameter semantics, and versioning. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke correctly without additional context.

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 has 100% parameter description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds significant contextual meaning: explains the semantics of the 'resources' parameter (omit vs []), and the atomicity caveat, enhancing understanding beyond 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 tool updates a tag by renaming key/value or replacing resource associations. It specifies the verb 'Update' and resource 'tag', and distinguishes from siblings like attach-tag/detach-tag by noting their suitability for small changes.

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 explicit guidance: when to use (update key/value or associations), when not (small association changes -> prefer attach-tag/detach-tag), prerequisites (provide at least one of key, value, resources), and versioning (v2-only).

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