update_feishu_bitable_record

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

The description reveals that it reads the real-time field structure before updating, which is useful behavioral context. However, with no annotations, it fails to mention permissions, error handling, or whether it overwrites or merges fields.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. First sentence states verb+resource, second provides critical usage detail. Information is front-loaded.

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?

Has output schema and 100% schema coverage. Description adds key behavioral nuance about select fields. Missing minor context like expected return format or error cases, but still solid.

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 already describes all parameters. The description adds valuable semantics: how to format values for single-select (string) and multi-select (array) fields, which is not in schema.

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 a Bitable row via record_id) and provides specific details about handling select fields. It distinguishes from siblings like create_* because it focuses on updating existing records.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., create_feishu_bitable_record). No when-not-to-use or prerequisites mentioned.

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