update_visualization

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states 'update', implying mutation, but does not disclose permissions, idempotency, error states, or side effects. The lack of any behavioral details reduces transparency significantly.

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, short sentence, which is concise. However, it is so brief that it lacks substance; it does not elaborate on the purpose beyond the obvious. It earns its place minimally.

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 (5 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, how errors are handled, or how to use it effectively. The schema covers parameters but not the overall behavior.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters adequately. The tool description adds nothing beyond the schema, resulting in a baseline score of 3.

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 'Update an existing visualization' clearly identifies the action and resource, using a specific verb and indicating that it operates on an existing entity. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'create_visualization' or 'update_chart_visualization'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusionary conditions. Users are left to infer based on the name alone.

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