retell_update_agent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It mentions the ability to switch response engine types, but does not disclose whether the update is partial or full, potential side effects, authentication needs, or required relationships among parameters. For a mutation tool, this is a significant transparency gap.

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 a single, focused sentence that front-loads the core purpose and the key differentiator. Every word earns its place, providing high clarity without redundancy.

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?

This is a complex tool with 12 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description does not explain update behavior (e.g., partial vs full replacement), mutual exclusivity of engine parameters, or return values. It leaves many critical operational details unaddressed, making it incomplete for safe autonomous invocation.

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 input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds minimal value by grouping engine-related parameters into a conceptual 'response engine type' switch, but does not explain inter-parameter constraints or provide deeper semantics beyond what the schema offers.

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 the resource 'existing Retell AI agent's configuration', and highlights a specific capability (switching response engine types) that distinguishes this tool from siblings like retell_create_agent or retell_delete_agent. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 for existing agents via the word 'existing', but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. It is clear enough to infer the tool is for updates, but lacks direct usage instructions.

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