Update string_stickers

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

Without annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'update' and 'soft-delete' but does not explain partial vs full update semantics, permanence of soft-delete, required permissions, or error conditions. The behavior is only superficially described.

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 one short sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It is efficient, though it could benefit from slightly more detail without becoming verbose.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and many siblings, the description is too sparse. It does not cover return values, usage context, or differentiation from similar tools like string_stickers_create or string_stickers_get.

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 40% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It mentions 'rename' (name), 'edit states' (states), and 'soft-delete' (deleted), but omits 'icon'. It adds no new meaning beyond the schema; 'edit states' remains vague. Insufficient detail for 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 action ('Update') and the resource ('string sticker'), and provides specific examples of what can be updated: rename, edit states, soft-delete. This distinguishes it from create, get, and list siblings.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool vs. alternatives, such as when to soft-delete vs. hard delete, or prerequisites. The description only implies it is for modifying existing stickers.

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