UpdateEntityState

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'Update Entity States' with no mention of side effects, permissions, reversibility, state transitions, or what distinguishes this mutation from other update tools. The agent cannot infer the behavioral contract.

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 short, but this is under-specification rather than deliberate conciseness. Three words that restate the tool name convey no useful information and do not earn their place as an explanatory description.

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 large set of entity-related sibling tools and the absence of annotations and output schema, a one-line tautology is completely inadequate. The agent cannot understand what entity states are, what updating them involves, what inputs it accepts, or what result to expect.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. The baseline of 4 applies because there is no schema/parameter gap that the description must compensate for, though the description still adds no operational meaning about how the update is scoped.

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 'Update Entity States' is essentially a restatement of the tool name 'UpdateEntityState'. It uses no specific verb beyond 'update' and no resource detail beyond 'Entity States', so it is a tautology rather than an explanation. With many sibling tools like UpdateEntity, UpdateEntityGetIDVToken, and UpdateCheckEntity, the description provides no way to distinguish this tool from alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use UpdateEntityState versus any of the many sibling tools. No context is provided about prerequisites, conditions, or scenarios that would select this tool. The description is entirely silent on usage.

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