Update the living style directives

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive/replacing nature ('Replace'), the requirement for a full body ('Pass the FULL new Markdown body, not a diff'), and the relationship to style_directives. It does not mention permissions or return values, but the key behavioral aspects are covered.

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 two sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states the action and object; the second provides usage guidance and alternatives. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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?

Given the simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, how to format the input, and what not to use it for. It also references the sibling tool style_directives to establish context.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter, so baseline is 3. The description adds crucial meaning beyond the schema by clarifying 'not a diff' and emphasizing 'FULL' body, which helps the agent understand the exact input format.

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 clearly states the tool's action: 'Replace the style directives document' — a specific verb with a specific resource. It also distinguishes this tool from siblings by referencing the mutable layer read by style_directives.

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 when-to-use guidance: 'Use to update current-season focus or fold in a confirmed preference shift.' It also provides an exclusion: 'Durable rule changes belong in the mens-style skill via /style-review, not here.'

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