blogs_update_blog_post

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the generic 'Update'. It fails to disclose side effects, permission requirements, or whether updating triggers related changes (e.g., publishing workflows). With openWorldHint true, the description should clarify what 'open world' behavior might occur, but it remains silent.

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 minimal (two words), but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It lacks structure, no examples, no precedence of important information. While short, it does not earn its place by communicating anything beyond the tool name.

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?

With 15 parameters, 12 required, and no output schema, this description is grossly incomplete. It provides no mention of how to obtain required IDs (except those few in schema), no error handling notes, no format expectations (e.g., ISO timestamps), and no guidance on partial updates vs full replacement. An agent attempting to use this tool would face significant ambiguity.

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 only 40%, and the description provides no parameter clarification whatsoever. While some schema properties have helpful descriptions (e.g., author and categories mention how to obtain IDs), the description itself adds zero value in guiding parameter usage, leaving many required fields (title, rawHTML, status, etc.) unexplained.

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 'Update Blog Post' clearly states the verb and resource, making its basic purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like blogs_create_blog_post and blogs_get_blog_post through the 'Update' action, though it lacks any detail about which aspects of the post can be modified.

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 alternatives. The description does not mention any prerequisites, such as ensuring the post exists, nor does it contrast with create or delete operations. An agent must infer usage entirely from the name and schema.

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