update_dataset

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only says 'update', implying mutation, but does not disclose permissions, reversibility, side effects, or validation rules. An agent cannot infer if the update is partial or full, or what happens to unset 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?

The description is very concise (one sentence), which is good for efficiency. However, it sacrifices necessary detail, making it minimally adequate. It is front-loaded with the action, but lacks any breakdown of behavior or parameters.

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?

For a tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, constraints, or the effect of missing optional fields. An agent would need external knowledge to use it 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate. It does not explain the parameters (e.g., that dataset_id identifies the dataset, while name and description are optional fields to update). The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no value beyond the 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) and the resource (dataset), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from other update tools (e.g., update_case) by specifying 'dataset'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings beyond the resource name.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the many sibling CRUD tools, the description should at least mention that it modifies an existing dataset, not create or delete. Missing context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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