update_queries

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

With no annotations, the description reveals the shallow-merge behavior for action_config and the refetch of Redux action list. However, it omits details about overwrite behavior for other fields, error handling, or required permissions.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded, followed by entry format and key behavioral note (merge and refetch). Each sentence adds distinct value.

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?

The description covers main usage and merge behavior but lacks return value, error handling, and prerequisite information (e.g., where to get query_ids). Given no output schema and no annotations, more context would be beneficial.

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 schema provides 0% coverage, so the description compensates by defining the entry structure (query_id, action_config?, name?, run_behaviour?) and explaining the shallow-merge semantics. It adds significant meaning beyond the schema, though type information is missing.

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 tool updates multiple queries in one call, with specific fields (query_id, action_config, name, run_behaviour). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_queries, create_queries, and other update tools.

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 batch updates and explains partial updates via shallow merge, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or what alternatives exist (e.g., updating a single query individually).

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