basecamp_index_update_project

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 a project is updated but does not disclose side effects, whether it rebuilds or increments the index, if it requires any preconditions, or whether it is destructive. Agents have no clues about performance implications or idempotency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for a tool with one parameter, though it could add a bit more context without becoming verbose.

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 one-parameter tool, the description is minimally viable. It states the action and target. However, without annotations or an output schema, it lacks context about what the index is, what changes occur, and when to use it relative to the sibling index tools. Given the complexity, more would be helpful but not strictly required.

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 schema covers 100% of the parameter with a clear description ('Project ID to update in index'). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. No missing parameter documentation.

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' and the resource 'index' for a specific project. It distinguishes from siblings like basecamp_index_build (which likely builds the whole index) and basecamp_index_get_project (which retrieves). However, what exactly 'index' refers to is not explained, keeping it slightly vague.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that this tool updates the index for a single project rather than all projects, nor does it reference any sibling tool. The name implies 'specific project' but the description doesn't explicitly contrast with index_build or others.

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