update_procedure

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It warns that body is executed verbatim as DDL, which is critical behavioral info. It does not mention permissions or reversibility, but the DDL caution is sufficient.

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 concise, front-loaded with the core action, and well-structured with sections for platform support, caution, and arguments.

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 an output schema exists (not shown but present), the description covers the tool's purpose, parameters, and a critical caution. It is complete for the complexity level.

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%, but the tool description fully explains all 4 parameters (workspace, item, qualified_name, body) with useful detail like 'dot-separated' and 'the AS … section', compensating completely.

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 ('Redefine a stored procedure') and the resource ('via CREATE OR ALTER PROCEDURE'), distinguishing it from siblings like create_procedure and drop_procedure.

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 caution about executing body verbatim provides important guidance, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus creating or dropping a procedure. The context is clear enough for an agent with sibling awareness.

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