update_signal

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

No annotations provided. The description only lists updatable fields but does not disclose behaviors such as what happens if signal_id is invalid, whether updates are atomic, or any required permissions.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with key information, no redundant words. Efficiently communicates the tool's core purpose.

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 5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It omits return value behavior, edge cases, and preconditions. Output schema exists but description should provide high-level context.

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 must compensate. It lists updatable fields but lacks semantic details like valid ranges for interval_seconds or structure of condition. Adds some value beyond schema but insufficient depth.

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 verb 'Update', the resource 'existing signal', and lists specific fields (label, condition, interval, active status). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like create_signal and delete_signal.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_signal or list_signals. No prerequisites (e.g., signal must exist) or exclusions provided.

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