Update an agent

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

Annotations already indicate mutability (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds 'Authorization class: board_or_agent', which is a behavioral constraint not in annotations. However, it does not disclose whether updates are partial or full, what side effects occur, or any other behavioral nuances.

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 very short (two lines) but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. The minimal text does not earn its place because it omits critical information about parameters and usage.

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 the high complexity of the input schema (many nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain return values, required fields, or any operational 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 description coverage is 0% and the description does not explain any of the many input parameters. Despite a complex schema with nested objects, the description offers no hints about how to use fields like 'name', 'status', or 'runtimeConfig'.

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 title and description state 'Update an agent', which is clear as a verb+resource pairing. However, among many agent-related sibling tools (e.g., pc_patch_agents_by_id_permissions, pc_patch_agents_by_id_instructions_path), the description does not differentiate what specific agent attributes this tool updates, making it vague.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pc_patch_agents_by_id_permissions or pc_post_agents_by_id_*. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusion criteria.

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