Update Edgeless Block

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

Annotations indicate a mutating operation (readOnlyHint=false), and the description adds behavioral details: merging x/y/width/height with current xywh, replacing background, and returning ignored fields. This goes beyond annotations, though it does not cover all aspects like auth or rate limits.

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?

Two efficient sentences with front-loaded purpose. Every sentence adds value, though the structure could be more organized (e.g., separating parameter behavior from ignored fields).

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 no output schema, the description explains input behavior but does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., the updated block or just success). It covers the key aspects for a partial update tool but lacks completeness on return values and error scenarios.

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?

The description explains the merge behavior for positional parameters and replacement for background, adding semantic value beyond the schema's property definitions. With 50% schema description coverage, the description compensates well for undocumented parameters.

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 updates a note/frame/edgeless-text block by id, with specific verb 'update' and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like delete_block or update_surface_element by targeting edgeless blocks specifically.

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 (for partial updates of edgeless blocks) but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives. It mentions ignored fields for inapplicable flavours, offering some guidance but lacks explicit comparison with other update tools.

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