update_activity

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'update an existing activity' with no details on mutation effects, error conditions (e.g., invalid activity_id), reversibility, or required permissions. This is 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?

The description is short (4 lines) and front-loaded with the purpose. However, it repeats parameter info already in the schema, and the linebreak 'Args:' structure is unnecessary. It could be more concise by omitting the parameter list.

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?

With an output schema present, return values don't need explanation. But the description lacks completeness in usage context, error handling, and constraints. For a tool with 3 parameters and no annotations, more context on prerequisites and side effects is needed.

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 must add meaning. It lists parameters and marks name and color as optional but adds no constraints (e.g., color format) or behavior beyond the schema. The parameter explanations are minimal and redundant with the property names.

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 'Update' and resource 'activity' with scope 'in EARLY'. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like create_activity or delete_activity, missing an opportunity to clarify when to use update versus those.

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 is provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The description simply states what it does without context for decision-making.

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