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

The description adds no behavioral detail beyond what annotations already provide. It doesn't mention that this is a patch operation, potential side effects, or that it's destructive. The annotations (destructiveHint=true) cover the basic safety, but the description fails to add context like 'overwrites existing content' or 'requires specific permissions'.

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 somewhat redundant ('Update paragraph' repeats the title). It's not front-loaded with the most critical guidance, and the '| context: id, paragraph_id' is cryptic. It's concise but not optimally structured.

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 tool with 7 parameters and many sibling paragraph-update tools, the description is too thin. It doesn't explain the scope of updates, how it differs from other paragraph updates, or any prerequisites. The schema provides parameter details, but the description fails to give usage context or return behavior.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description only mentions 'id' and 'paragraph_id' as context, which the schema already documents. It adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 clear action ('Update') and resource ('map item paragraph'), and distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying the map context. However, it doesn't explicitly enumerate what fields can be updated, though the schema covers that.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other update_*_paragraph tools. It only mentions the required context (id, paragraph_id) but doesn't give exclusions or alternatives. The name implies map paragraphs, but there's no explicit 'use this for map paragraphs only' statement.

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