summarize_system_updates

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It discloses return type ('update counts and meta') and accepted advisory types, but doesn't mention permissions or side effects. Adequate but could be more transparent.

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?

Concise with 5 sentences, front-loaded purpose. Minor redundancy ('Inputs:' prefix) but overall efficient and well-structured.

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 2 parameters and existence of output schema, description covers inputs, resolution, and output type. Sufficient for selection and correct invocation.

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 0%, yet description adds significant meaning: explains 'system_identifier' can be name or id and suggests resolution method, lists valid advisory_types values, and marks it optional. Adds value beyond schema.

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 'Summarize pending updates for one system', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'summarize_fleet_updates' by specifying 'one system'.

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 advises 'Best for counts only' and provides a resolution step using 'find_systems_by_name', guiding when to use and how to prep inputs. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use but clear context.

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