Actualizar scope OAuth

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

No annotations are present, and the description provides no behavioral details such as side effects, permission requirements, or whether the update is partial or full replacement. The agent gets no insight into what happens beyond the basic action.

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 sentence that concisely conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for the minimal information it delivers.

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 no annotations, sparse schema descriptions, and a description that only states the action, the context is highly incomplete. The agent is left without knowledge of required fields, optional parameter meanings, or any expected output.

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?

The schema covers only 25% of parameters with descriptions (only id). The description does not explain the meaning of name, extra, or description, nor does it clarify how they are updated. It merely repeats 'por id' without adding 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 action (actualiza), the resource (scope OAuth), and the selector (por id), distinguishing it from other scope-related tools like create_oauth_scope or delete_oauth_scope.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as update_scope or update_oauth_client. The description neither mentions conditions nor contrasts with sibling tools.

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