update_keyword

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation (false), the description adds that updates are partial ('Only the fields you pass change') and happen in place. This provides useful behavioral context without contradicting annotations.

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 extremely concise at two sentences, front-loads the action clearly, and contains no redundant information. Every sentence adds value.

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 complexity with 9 parameters and an output schema, the description effectively conveys the core behavior (partial update). It omits some specifics like required parameters, but these are covered in the schema, making it sufficiently complete.

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 100%, so the schema already describes all parameters and their defaults. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 it updates an existing keyword in place, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like add_keywords or delete_keyword by specifying modification rather than creation or deletion.

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 implies usage when you want to modify a keyword, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide context about prerequisites such as requiring the keyword to exist.

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