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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description explains exactly what is replaced and when user edits are lost, plus an explicit 'ask first' safety instruction. It also describes a preview path via get_template, adding valuable behavioral context for a destructive update.

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 compact and front-loaded: the core update behavior comes first, followed by replacement semantics and the safety warning. Every sentence contributes useful information with no filler.

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 destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the core behavior, destructive overwrite risk, required caution, and a preview alternative. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 schema already documents app_id, template_id, overwrite, and parameters. The description reinforces the meaning and risk of overwrite but does not add syntax or semantics for the parameters object or other fields 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 and resource: updating an app's installed template to the template's newest version. It distinguishes this from merely installing a template by describing the existing app/template relationship and replacement behavior.

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 gives clear usage context by advising the agent to ask first before using overwrite because user changes are lost. It also points to get_template with app_id as a preview step, though it does not explicitly compare with the sibling install_template tool.

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