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

Annotations already establish that this is a non-destructive, idempotent mutation, and the description adds the important scope detail that only title and category are changed. It does not add much beyond that, such as confirming other document fields remain untouched, but it is consistent with 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 a single focused sentence with the key scope up front and no wasted text. The parenthetical adds useful format guidance without bloating the definition.

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?

The tool has annotations and an output schema, which reduce the description's burden, and it clearly states the mutable fields. However, with 0% schema description coverage across four parameters, it leaves the two required identifier parameters unexplained.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It clarifies title and category, including that category should match list_documents output, but it says nothing about the required household_id and doc_id parameters.

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 gives a specific verb ('Change') and resource ('household document') and narrows scope to two fields: title and category. An agent can distinguish this from sibling operations like delete_document, upload_document, and list_documents.

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 implies the tool is for metadata updates and gives a useful category-format reference to list_documents, but it does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives or what this tool should not be used for.

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