update_script_content

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

Discloses critical side effect: 'any file NOT included in files is deleted.' Also mentions required OAuth scope. With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the behavioral transparency burden and does so excellently.

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?

Three sentences, no fluff. First sentence states purpose, second warns of side effect, third gives usage guidance. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Covers purpose, side effect, prerequisite action, auth requirement. With an output schema present for return value details, the description is complete for a mutation tool of moderate complexity.

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%, so baseline is 3. The schema itself already describes parameters in detail (e.g., files array structure). Description adds no extra parameter-specific meaning beyond behavioral context.

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?

Clearly states 'Write files into an Apps Script project (replacing the full set)'. Specific verb (write), resource (Apps Script project), and key differentiator (full replace). Distinguishes from sibling tools like get_script_content or run_script_function.

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?

Explicitly instructs to 'Always fetch via get_script_project first, modify the set, and pass the complete list back.' Provides a clear prerequisite and workflow. Missing explicit 'when not to use', but the guidance is strong.

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