update_action

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only discloses that patch.kind must match, but lacks information on mutability, idempotency, permissions, or effects of the update.

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, very concise, but at the expense of completeness. It is appropriately front-loaded but lacks detail.

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 params, complex patch schema with discriminator, 25 siblings), the description is insufficient. It does not explain the patch structure, kind values, or output schema (if exists).

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 0%, so description should compensate. It only mentions patch.kind, ignoring scene_name and item_id. The meaning of these parameters and how to construct the patch object 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?

The description clearly states 'Update one action' which is a specific verb-resource pair. The additional constraint 'patch.kind must match its existing action kind' distinguishes it from add_action and other update tools.

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 constraint on patch.kind provides some guidance, but there is no explicit mention of when to use versus alternatives like add_action or other update tools. The sibling context implies creation vs update but not stated.

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