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

Annotations show destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. Description adds context: URL, counts, expiry remain; resending identical content is a no-op. However, it doesn't detail any irreversible consequences or permission requirements beyond what annotations suggest.

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?

Three short sentences: first states core purpose, second adds behavioral details, third gives usage guidance. No unnecessary words; front-loaded with the primary action.

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?

Covers main effect and distinguishes from publish, but leaves gaps: no mention of error handling, slug validation, or required permissions. Output schema exists, so return values are not needed, but common edge cases are unaddressed.

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?

Input schema has 4 parameters with 0% description coverage. Description mentions 'body, format, and title change' but does not explain individual parameters like slug (likely the page identifier) or format enum values. Compensation for missing schema descriptions is insufficient.

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?

Description clearly states 'Replace the content of one of your pages in place' and specifies what changes vs stays same. Distinguishes from sibling 'publish' by noting that a second publish creates a new link.

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?

Explicitly instructs to prefer this over publish when revising, warning that a second publish strands the shared link. No guidance on when to use vs delete_page or get_page, but the main alternative is covered.

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