update_counter

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

No annotations are provided. The description only says 'update' and lists the fields, but does not disclose behavioral aspects such as permissions required, idempotency, side effects, or reversibility. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It is concise with no unnecessary words.

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 tool has three parameters with good schema coverage, but no output schema. The description does not mention return values, error cases, or partial update behavior. For a simple update, it covers the basics but lacks completeness in describing what happens after the 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% and each parameter has a clear description. The tool description adds 'change its name or site URL', which is consistent with the schema but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema definitions.

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 'Update an existing Yandex.Metrica counter — change its name or site URL.' It specifies the verb (update), resource (counter), and the specific fields (name, site URL), distinguishing it from siblings like create_counter or delete_counter.

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 implicitly suggests using this tool when you need to change the name or URL of a counter, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives like create_goal or delete_counter. No exclusions or prerequisites are provided.

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