update_case

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. Notes partial update behavior, but does not disclose idempotency, success response structure, or error handling beyond what schema implies. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Two concise sentences front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds meaningful guidance without redundancy.

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 no annotations or output schema, the description provides essential prerequisites (get_case_fields) and partial update support. Could mention return value or side effects, but overall sufficient for a mutation tool with well-defined parameters.

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 covers both parameters fully (100% coverage). Description adds value by emphasizing requirement to use system_names from get_case_fields and clarifying partial update semantics, which goes beyond schema descriptions.

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?

Clearly states 'Update a test case in TestRail' with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings like add_case, get_case, and update_cases (batch) by focusing on single-case update.

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 usage context: requires field names from get_case_fields and supports partial updates. However, does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tool update_cases (plural) or state 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.