update-slo-correction

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Update' without disclosing side effects, required permissions, or whether the update is partial/full. The description also omits mention of updatable fields like 'duration', 'timezone', and 'rrule' that are in the schema, creating a minor inconsistency.

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 that front-loads the core purpose. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 the complexity (8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimal. It explains the basic purpose but lacks details on how updates are applied (partial vs full), expected behavior, and return values. It is adequate for a simple update but could be more complete.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter described (e.g., 'Updated category'). The description adds only a subset of fields, not enhancing the schema's meaning. It does not explain relationships like duration vs start/end, so the added value is minimal. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Update', the resource 'SLO correction', and specifies the updatable attributes: 'category, time range, or description'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like create-slo-correction and delete-slo-correction.

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 implies usage when an existing SLO correction needs modification. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update-slo) nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The context is clear but lacks depth.

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