Update Document Icon

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 that the tool sets or clears the icon and accepts different input formats, but it does not mention side effects (e.g., overwriting existing icons), error conditions, or idempotency. Basic transparency is present but incomplete.

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 concise: two sentences front-loading the core action, then summarizing possible inputs. Every sentence is useful, with no redundancy or 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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description could be more complete. It covers core functionality and input formats, but omits workspaceId context, success/failure responses, and error handling. Adequate for a simple mutation but not fully self-contained.

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 67% (workspaceId lacks description). The description adds value by explaining the icon parameter's variants (emoji string, object, null) and removal behavior. However, it does not compensate for the missing workspaceId description, leaving a gap. Overall, adds some meaning but not fully.

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 purpose: setting or clearing the sidebar icon on a document. It specifies the action ('Set or clear') and the resource ('sidebar icon'), and distinguishes this from siblings like get_doc_icon by focusing on the write operation.

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 implies when to use (when you want to change the icon) but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use, prerequisites (e.g., document existence), or alternatives. It lacks differentiation from sibling tools like get_doc_icon or update_doc_title.

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