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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral detail beyond annotations: only non-null fields are updated, and seliee_page_faqs replaces the entire FAQ list rather than appending to it.

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 tight sentences with no wasted wording. The core purpose and lookup method are front-loaded, followed by the most important update semantics.

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 an 11-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no schema descriptions, the description covers key update semantics but not enough parameter detail. It also does not clarify whether at least one of page_id or page_uuid must be supplied, which matters because the schema marks both optional.

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% across 11 parameters. The description explains the page identifier fields and the FAQ replacement behavior, but leaves most editable fields such as slug, type, title, poster, content, keywords, language, and description without added meaning.

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 and resource: editing fields of an existing seliee_page. It also clarifies the lookup keys, page_id or page_uuid, which distinguishes this from create, delete, and read operations on pages.

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 implies this tool is for editing an existing page and identifies how the page is found. However, it does not explicitly say when to use edit_page versus siblings such as update_page_keys or publish_page, nor does it state exclusions or prerequisites.

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