update_contact

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only hints at partial update semantics ('only include the fields you want to change') but omits other behavioral details such as permissions, idempotency, error handling, or rate limits.

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 with two sentences, no filler words, and front-loaded with the action and resource. Every sentence contributes meaning.

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 of 15 parameters, low schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is adequate but incomplete. It provides the key partial update hint and prerequisite but lacks details on return values, constraints, or potential side effects.

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?

The description adds value by clarifying the partial update pattern, but with 15 parameters and only 47% schema description coverage, it does not compensate for the lack of descriptions for many parameters (e.g., city, state, zipCode). The hint is useful but insufficient.

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 verb 'Update' and resource 'existing contact', distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_contact and get_contact. It also provides a usage hint regarding partial updates.

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 explicitly advises to 'only include the fields you want to change' and to 'use find_contacts first to get the contactId', providing clear usage context and a prerequisite step. However, it lacks explicit exclusions or when not to use this tool versus alternatives.

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