nexo_reminder_update

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

States 'Only non-empty fields are changed', revealing how the tool handles optional parameters. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it adequately discloses the partial update behavior and the token requirement.

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 sentences plus a highlighted IMPORTANT note. Every sentence is informative and necessary. No fluff.

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?

Covers core behavior, precondition, and optional parameter handling. Lacks output explanation, but no output schema exists. Sufficient for a mutation tool with clear prerequisites.

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 coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining that empty fields are ignored. It also reinforces the read_token parameter's origin. This goes beyond what the schema alone provides.

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 fields of an existing reminder', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like nexo_reminder_create and nexo_reminder_delete by focusing on updates.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call nexo_reminder_get first and pass its read_token, providing a clear prerequisite. Does not mention when not to use or compare with alternatives, but the directive is strong.

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