Change a document's share settings

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

The critical behavioral note 'Settings that are not mentioned keep their current value' is disclosed, which is essential for partial updates and goes beyond the annotations. The description also correctly implies mutation (consistent with readOnlyHint=false) and idempotency (consistent with idempotentHint=true). No contradictory information.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and a compact list of affected settings. The 'keep current value' caveat is included in the second sentence without waste. 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?

The tool has 16 parameters, a required 'file', an output schema, and annotations. The description covers the overall purpose and the crucial partial-update behavior. It does not mention plan gating or clearing details, but those are in the schema descriptions. The description is complete enough for correct selection and invocation, though it could have added a hint about when not to use it.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the schema already describes each parameter. The description adds high-level value by grouping settings (e.g., 'vanity slug' → slug, 'page range' → pageFrom/pageTo) and by stating that omitted parameters are preserved, which clarifies the semantics of all parameters collectively.

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 uses a specific verb ('Change'), identifies the resource ('existing EveryPage document'), and enumerates the share settings it affects. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like everypage_share_pdf by focusing on updating an existing document rather than creating a new share.

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 makes clear this is for existing documents and lists the range of settings, implying it is the go-to for altering share settings. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., 'use everypage_share_pdf to create a new share'), but the context of 'existing' provides strong guidance.

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