update-sections

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

The annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description adds that multiple sections are updated in one call, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not disclose whether unspecified fields are cleared or preserved, nor any other side effects beyond the destructive nature already annotated.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and target without redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, and every word earns its place.

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?

Despite being short, the description is largely complete given the low complexity, detailed schema, and presence of annotations. The output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The only minor gap is lack of guidance on usage context, but that is not critical for a straightforward update operation.

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%, with each parameter already having a clear description (e.g., 'Pass null to clear it' for description). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 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 clearly specifies the verb 'update' and the resource 'sections', and adds 'multiple existing' to convey batch operation on existing items. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add-sections (creation) and find-sections (retrieval).

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 usage for modifying existing sections, but it does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. There is no mention of 'use add-sections for new sections' or similar guidance, so the usage context is only implied.

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