gitee_update_file

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

No annotations are present, so the description must cover behavioral aspects. It only states 'update', implying a write operation, but does not disclose what happens (e.g., creates a commit, overwrites content), required permissions, or side effects. The description is insufficient for behavioral transparency.

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 short sentence, which is concise but lacks any structure (e.g., bullet points, examples). It is adequate but not exemplary; a bit more detail could improve usability without sacrificing conciseness.

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 tool has 11 parameters (6 required) and no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns, how it handles errors, and the commit behavior. It fails to provide this context, making it incomplete for effective use.

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% with clear descriptions for each parameter (e.g., base64-encoded content, SHA). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but since the schema is comprehensive, baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 an existing file' clearly states the action and resource. While concise, it effectively communicates the core function. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like gitee_create_file or gitee_commit_multiple_files, but the purpose is still clear.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., file must exist, SHA required) or context (e.g., works with a branch). The description lacks any usage context, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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