coda_update_row

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

The description discloses that only specified columns are modified while others remain unchanged, and that it returns a requestId for async mutation tracking. This adds behavioral context beyond the annotations (idempotentHint, openWorldHint). No contradiction with annotations.

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 very concise, with three front-loaded sentences that cover purpose, behavior, and usage guidance. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description adequately covers the tool's behavior, parameters, and return value (requestId). It is complete for an update operation with good annotations.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, baseline is 3. The description provides an example for the 'cells' parameter showing the format {column: name, value: val}, which adds valuable meaning beyond the schema's generic description.

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 it updates a single row in a Coda table, specifying that only specific column values are changed. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like coda_insert_rows by noting that for bulk updates, that tool should be used instead.

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 using column names instead of IDs, and explicitly mentions an alternative tool (coda_insert_rows) for bulk upsert. It lacks explicit exclusion conditions but provides clear guidance on when to use the alternative.

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