indico_update_session_block

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuine business rule beyond the structured fields: the block cannot become shorter than the entries it contains, which an agent could not infer from the schema.

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?

Two short sentences, action front-loaded, with the constraint as a distinct second sentence. Nothing redundant or padded.

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?

With an output schema present the description needn't explain returns, and the mutation semantics plus the minimum-duration rule cover the essentials. It stops short of noting that title and duration are both optional/nullable, which is only visible in the schema defaults.

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 60% and the description only names the two mutable fields (title, duration), which maps to part of the schema. entry_id, event_id and instance semantics come from the schema itself, so the description adds little beyond the stated alterable fields.

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?

Names a specific verb (change) and resource (session block) and enumerates the two mutable fields, duration and title. It is distinguishable from indico_update_session, but the description never explicitly contrasts the two siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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 statement of when to use this versus indico_update_session or indico_create_session_block, and no prerequisites (e.g. that the block must already exist in the timetable). The constraint on duration is a rule, not usage guidance.

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