update_module

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, destructive actions, permissions, or behavior for omitted parameters (e.g., whether they remain unchanged). Only minimal per-parameter behavior is hinted (e.g., 'empty string to remove' for unlock_at).

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 structured as a concise bullet list with clear purpose in the first line. It is relatively efficient, though the parameter list could be more compact for an AI agent.

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 output schema exists, return values are covered. However, the description lacks behavioral context (e.g., partial update behavior) and does not explain the tool's full effect, making it minimally adequate for an 8-parameter update tool.

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%, but the description adds meaningful context for each parameter (e.g., 'New position in module list', 'Students must complete items in order'). This significantly aids the AI in understanding parameter intent beyond the schema's titles and types.

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 'Update an existing module's settings.' It uses a specific verb (update) and resource (module settings), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_module, delete_module, and update_module_item.

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 for updating existing modules but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance or prerequisites.

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