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

Annotations already communicate that this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and not destructive. The description adds useful scoping by stating that position is not updated here, but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as whether omitted properties are left unchanged, permission requirements, or what the API returns.

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 three short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the main action, then provides the prerequisite lookup method, and closes with an explicit exclusion and pointer to the correct alternative tool.

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?

For a relatively simple update tool with full schema coverage, the description is complete: it identifies what properties are changed, which ones are not, how to find the required parameter, and which sibling handles the excluded behavior. No output schema exists, but the description adequately supports correct invocation.

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 input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so each parameter is already documented. The description adds only a high-level mapping to 'visibility, elevation, rotation' and repeats the token-list hint, without providing substantial new meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb ('Update'), a clear resource ('token properties'), and explicitly enumerates the updated fields: visibility, elevation, rotation. It also distinguishes itself from token-move by saying position is not changed here, making it easy for an agent to select the correct sibling tool.

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 explicit usage guidance: use token-list to find the tokenId, and use token-move instead when repositioning is needed. This clearly communicates when to use this tool versus the relevant alternative.

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