update_release

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

Beyond the annotations, the description adds important partial-update semantics: only provided fields are updated and omitted fields remain unchanged. This helps prevent destructive accidental field resets. It does not describe return values, but annotations already cover idempotency and non-destructiveness.

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 two compact sentences with no filler. It front-loads the purpose, follows with the most important behavioral rule, and ends with a directly actionable prerequisite.

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 full 100% schema coverage, the idempotentHint annotation, and the simple update semantics, this description is complete enough. It covers what the tool does, the partial-update behavior, and the recommended sequencing with get_release.

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 100%, so each parameter is already documented. The description adds critical cross-parameter semantics: omitted fields are left untouched, which is essential for correctly forming an update request. This goes beyond what individual parameter descriptions convey.

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 uses the specific verb 'Update' with the resource 'release metadata', making the operation unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_release, delete_release, and get_release by stating exactly what it modifies.

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 description gives clear context: it is for updating release metadata and explicitly instructs agents to call get_release first to fetch current values. It explains the partial-update behavior, but it does not explicitly list exclusions or name alternative tools for similar actions.

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