pls_update_area_rule

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

Annotations include destructiveHint=true, so the description's confirmation parameter adds context but doesn't significantly extend beyond what's already declared. No mention of side effects, permissions, or concurrency.

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?

Very concise: three short sentences covering action, parameters, return format, and a usage hint. Front-loaded with emoji, no superfluous text.

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?

Adequate for a CRUD tool with high schema coverage and annotations. Could mention idempotency or partial vs full replacement more explicitly, but the hint conveys partial update.

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 coverage is 100% with good descriptions for each parameter. The description's note '确认+只传需改字段' adds mild guidance on partial updates, but largely duplicates schema info.

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 '更新区域规则实体' (update area rule entity), specifying the verb (update) and the resource (area rule). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create and delete area rules.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_area_rules or create_area_rule. The hint '确认+只传需改字段' is tactical but doesn't provide context for decision-making.

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