update-context-after-operation

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

No annotations provided, so description must convey behavioral traits. It mentions 'after successful' but does not disclose potential side effects, idempotency, or whether it is a read or write operation. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand implications.

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?

Description is a single sentence, appropriately short and front-loaded. It conveys core purpose without excess words, though could be slightly more structured with a list or bullet format.

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 complexity (3 required params, enum, nested object) and lack of output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what 'context' means, how updates are applied, or any constraints (e.g., what happens if operationType is invalid). This leaves gaps for the agent.

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 67% (entityId and updates have descriptions, operationType lacks description). The description adds no extra context for parameters; it merely repeats the operationType enum values implicitly. With moderate coverage, more description could help but is missing.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Update' and resource 'MCP context' with condition 'after successful VM or service operations'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'set-mcp-context' and 'get-mcp-context', though could be more explicit about the differentiation.

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?

Description does not provide when-to-use guidance, alternatives, or exclusions. It implies use after successful operations but lacks explicit instructions for the AI agent to choose this tool over others.

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