airbyte_update_tag

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description adds value by stating the return value. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise with two main sentences plus an example. Information is front-loaded and no unnecessary text.

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 is simple (rename a tag) and the description covers purpose, usage, and return value. With output schema present, no further details are needed.

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 description coverage is 0%, meaning the description does not elaborate on parameters. The schema itself provides brief descriptions for tag_id and name, but the description adds no additional meaning or guidance for using the parameters.

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 tag's name', specifying the verb (update) and resource (tag name). It distinguishes from sibling tools like airbyte_create_tag and airbyte_delete_tag.

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 'When to Use' section provides clear context: 'Rename a tag for better organization.' While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use, the purpose is straightforward and no alternative tool is mentioned.

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