Изменить данные аккаунта

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations by disclosing the partial update semantics: unspecified fields remain unchanged. This is a key behavioral trait not captured by the schema or annotations. No contradiction.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and contains no redundant information. Every phrase earns its place, including the partial update warning.

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?

For a simple 5-parameter, 0-required mutation tool with annotations in place, the description covers the essential behavior: what fields change and the partial update semantics. It doesn't describe return values or error conditions, but no output schema is provided, and those aspects are not critical for a tool of this simplicity.

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?

While the schema has 100% coverage with per-field descriptions, those descriptions are minimal labels (e.g., 'Телефон.'). The description adds value by grouping fields into logical categories (ФИО, телефон, часовой пояс) and, more importantly, explaining that all parameters are optional and only those passed will be updated. This is crucial for correct invocation.

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 uses the specific verb 'меняет' (changes) and names the exact fields (ФИО, телефон, часовой пояс) and the resource (учётная запись). This clearly distinguishes it from read-only sibling tools like whoami and any other tools in the list.

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 description provides clear context for when to use the tool (when account details need changing) and gives an explicit instruction on how to invoke it: 'Передавайте только те поля, которые нужно изменить' (pass only fields to change). It doesn't mention alternatives, but none exist among the siblings, so this is acceptable.

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