cml_update_bounded_context

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

The description includes only the verb 'Update', which implies mutation, but provides no details on whether the operation is idempotent, what happens to unspecified fields, required permissions, or error conditions. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, which 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 very concise (one sentence of three words). While it avoids unnecessary verbosity, it offers no structural elements (e.g., bullet lists) and feels minimal rather than efficiently informative.

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 (6 parameters, a mutation operation, no output schema, and no annotations), the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, field update behavior, or how it fits into the broader toolset, leaving the agent with gaps for correct 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, with each parameter already described in the input schema (e.g., 'Current name of the bounded context'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline 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 clearly states the action ('Update') and the resource ('bounded context'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like cml_delete_bounded_context or cml_get_bounded_context, which is acceptable for a generic update tool.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., cml_create_bounded_context for new contexts). There is no mention of prerequisites, such as requiring an existing context with the given name, or when not to use it.

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