Create or update an Actor task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the upsert-like behavior ('Re-using an existing id updates it'), but omits important behavioral details such as whether fields are merged or replaced, permission requirements, side effects, or what the call returns.

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 and front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence efficiently captures the update behavior, though the 'search worth repeating' phrasing is slightly informal and could be more precise.

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?

Given four parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description leaves substantial gaps: it does not explain all parameters, required fields, return values, or edge cases around updating an existing task. It only covers the basic save/update behavior.

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 only 50%, and the description does not explain the undocumented 'input' or 'title' parameters. It vaguely refers to 'a body of JSON to retype', which hints at the input parameter, but adds no concrete semantics for required parameters or defaults.

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 uses the specific verb 'Save' with a named Actor configuration as the resource, and clarifies that reusing an existing id updates it. This clearly differentiates the tool from siblings like run-actor-task, call-actor, and delete-actor-task.

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 phrase 'a search worth repeating' implies the tool is meant for saving reusable configurations, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus run-actor-task or call-actor, nor does it mention exclusions or alternatives.

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