Update a tool access profile entry

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (write operation) and destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'Update' and the HTTP method (PATCH), but does not explain behavioral traits like partial updates, immediate effects, or potential side effects. With openWorldHint=true, more transparency would be beneficial.

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 to the point, consisting of two sentences. It is efficient but could be improved by adding parameter context without sacrificing brevity.

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 tool's complexity (nested objects, many parameters, output schema exists), the description is too minimal. It does not explain what a tool access profile entry is, how updates work, or any nuances. The absence of parameter descriptions makes the tool difficult to use correctly.

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 coverage is 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions in the schema. The description itself does not describe any parameters, leaving the agent to infer meaning from names alone. This is insufficient for correct usage.

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 'Update a tool access profile entry', with a specific verb and resource. The HTTP method and path provide further precision. The tool name distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'pc_post_tool_profiles_by_profile_id_entries' (create) and 'pc_delete_tool_profile_entries_by_entry_id' (delete).

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 the HTTP method and authorization class, offering some guidance. However, it lacks explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' instructions relative to siblings. The naming convention implies this is for updating existing entries, but this is not directly stated.

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