update_custom_functions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the mutation nature and the need for explicit confirmation. It doesn't detail effects of adding/removing functions, but the input schema covers that. Overall, adequate transparency for a simple mutation.

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 concise sentence with a dash, front-loading the purpose and action. Every part earns its place, no wasted words.

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 mutation tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: purpose, mutation flag, and confirmation requirement. It could mention return value or error handling, but not essential given schema completeness.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters. It mentions confirm=true but that's in schema. No added semantic value.

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 tool configures custom AI functions (APIs) that the AI can call during conversations. It uses specific verb 'Configurar' and resource 'funciones personalizadas IA', distinguishing it from many update_* siblings.

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 explicitly notes that the tool is a mutation requiring confirmation ('requiere confirmación: pasar confirm=true para ejecutar'). This gives clear context for when to use it, though it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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