doc_page_update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions that all fields are optional for partial updates, but omits details like what happens if docId is missing, error handling, or whether the update is idempotent. The description is insufficient for an update operation.

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 extremely concise with just three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the action, clarifying optional fields, and providing a prerequisite. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 5 parameters with no output schema and no annotations. The description covers only the basic update functionality and the need to find docId, but does not explain return values, error conditions, or the effect of omitting projectId. Lack of output schema and behavioral details makes this incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all 5 parameters, so the schema already defines parameter semantics. The description adds the note 'All fields are optional', which reinforces that only docId is required, but does not provide additional meaning beyond what is in the schema.

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 'Update an existing documentation page' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like doc_page_create, doc_page_delete, doc_page_get, and doc_page_list in the context signals.

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 advises 'Use doc_page_list first to find the page ID', providing a prerequisite hint. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like doc_page_create when the page doesn't exist, or when not to use it.

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