update-slo

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the merge behavior and write-gating. However, it does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., updated SLO), error scenarios, or idempotency. This is adequate but leaves gaps for an agent.

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 efficient sentences: first lists what can be updated, second explains the merge behavior. No unnecessary words and front-loaded with key information.

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 covers purpose, merge behavior, and write-gating. Given no output schema or annotations, it lacks information on return values and error handling. Adequate for a simple tool but could be improved.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions. The description adds value by explaining the merge strategy for unspecified fields, which is not clear from the schema alone.

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 the verb 'Update' and resource 'existing SLO', and lists specific fields (name, description, thresholds, monitorIds, tags). This clearly differentiates from sibling tools like create-slo or delete-slo.

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 context that it is for updating existing SLOs and mentions the merge behavior ('Fetches current SLO first to merge unspecified fields'). It does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternatives, but the purpose is clear.

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