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

The description discloses that the tool is state-changing and content-destructive, aligning with the destructiveHint annotation. However, it omits the ability to move the document via the parent_id parameter, which is a significant behavioral effect not covered by the annotations.

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 sentences, concise, and front-loaded with the use case. It does not contain unnecessary details.

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 tool's six parameters and lack of output schema, the description provides essential context but misses the move behavior via parent_id. It also doesn't mention idempotency or return values, but these are less critical.

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 descriptions cover all six parameters (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal detail beyond restating content/title, and does not clarify the role of parent_id or type.

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 (replace or update markdown content/title of an existing Space document) and identifies the resource type, distinguishing it from siblings like create-space-document and get-space-document. It also includes a conditional instruction to read first when preserving content.

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?

It explicitly states 'Use this when...' and provides a conditional guidance about reading first. However, it does not explicitly contrast with create-space-document or other update tools, though the context is clear enough.

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