Api chat questionnaire questions update

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that — no mention of what the update affects, whether partial vs full replacement semantics apply, or any auth/rate-limit context.

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?

It is a single opaque token — not verbose but also not organized prose. There is no front-loaded statement of action or outcome to guide the agent.

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?

For a mutation endpoint with a free-form body object, zero schema coverage, and no output schema, the description should explain what is being updated and what the body should contain. None of that is provided, leaving the definition unusable without external API docs.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description says nothing about the two parameters. The 'id' identifier and the untyped 'body' object (additionalProperties: true, nullable) are entirely undocumented in both schema and description, so the agent has no basis for constructing the payload.

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 is literally the identifier string 'api_chat_questionnaire_questions_update' restated, with no verb phrasing or explanatory content. An agent can only infer 'update a chat questionnaire question' from parsing the name itself, which is tautology rather than a purpose statement.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as api_chat_questionnaire_questions_partial_update, _create, or _update variants. No prerequisites, no exclusions, nothing implied beyond the raw name.

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