update_widget

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that raw_configuration takes precedence over typed configuration and that omitting fields keeps current values, but does not mention side effects, permissions, or reversibility of updates.

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?

Moderate length with clear front-loading of purpose. The 'Update-specific notes' section is somewhat redundant but overall efficient. Could be slightly tighter but is well-organized.

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 7 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description covers key usage aspects and references add_widget_to_dashboard for full raw_configuration reference. Lacks return value info but is otherwise complete.

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% so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining raw_configuration in detail (including nrqlQueries array requirement and precedence) and clarifying omission behavior for widget_type and layout.

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 explicitly states 'Update an existing widget on a dashboard', clearly identifying the verb (update) and resource (widget on dashboard). It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_widget_to_dashboard and delete_widget.

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?

Provides clear context for optional raw_configuration parameter and notes on omitting fields to retain current values. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus other update or widget tools among siblings.

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