update-assessment

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (write) and openWorldHint=true (flexible schema). The description adds no extra behavioral details, such as whether updates are incremental or full replacement, or any side effects. Does not build on annotation signals.

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 extremely short (one sentence), but it under-specifies. Conciseness should not sacrifice informativeness. With 5 undocumented parameters, a sentence is insufficient.

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 tool's complexity (5 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, no schema descriptions), the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain the purpose of parameters, return value, or any usage context.

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%, so the description must explain parameters, but it does not. None of the 5 parameters (traceId, assessmentId, value, rationale, metadata) are described. The description adds zero semantic value beyond the raw parameter names.

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 states 'Update an existing assessment', which clearly indicates the verb (update) and resource (assessment). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get-assessment' and 'delete-assessment', but lacks specificity on which fields can be updated.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or context like creating vs updating. For example, does the assessment need to exist? No hints provided.

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