tigergraph__update_data_source

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey side effects, permissions, or reversibility. It only states that an existing configuration is updated, without mentioning potential destructive behavior, validation outcomes, or what happens if the data source does not exist.

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, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is well-structured and immediately conveys the tool's action without fluff or repetition.

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 provides the core purpose, and the schema covers parameter details. However, there is no information about return values or side effects, and the nested 'config' object is loosely defined (additionalProperties). An agent might need more clarity on expected output or error handling, making it slightly incomplete.

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?

All parameters are described in the schema: data_source_name, config, data_source_type, and profile. Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description itself adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema already provides.

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's purpose: to update an existing data source configuration. The verb 'update' and resource 'data source configuration' are specific, and the tool is easily distinguished from sibling tools like create, get, or drop data sources.

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 such as create_data_source or drop_data_source. The description does not mention prerequisites, conditions, or scenarios where this tool is preferred over others.

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