update_kit

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions some behaviors (removing by empty string, Pro+ requirements), but does not disclose auth needs, rate limits, side effects on unchanged parameters, or error conditions. Partial disclosure.

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 a single, well-structured paragraph with two sentences. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and each sentence adds necessary detail without redundancy.

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 complexity (11 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides an overview and key parameter details. However, it lacks information on return values, error handling, and restrictions for non-Pro+ plans, leaving gaps for complete understanding.

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%, but the description adds valuable context beyond the schema: it explains the source of CDN URLs (upload_file/upload_asset) and the reset behavior for Pro+ parameters (pass null). This enriches parameter understanding.

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 verb 'Update' and resource 'kit's top-level settings', listing examples like name, accent color, template. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like publish_kit or add_block.

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 some specific usage hints (e.g., passing CDN URLs for images, setting empty string to remove), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like create_kit or update_block. No exclusion criteria.

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