Api questions update

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond them (no statement about which fields are replaced, whether omitted fields are cleared, or whether the referenced Question must exist) and the blanket "CRUD" wording is imprecise for a single update endpoint.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, so there is no verbosity problem. However the brevity is under-specification rather than economy: the one sentence carries no actionable content an agent could act on.

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?

This is a mutating endpoint with an untyped, undocumented body, no output schema, and several close siblings; the definition provides none of the missing context (body shape, update semantics, id requirements). Inadequate for the complexity of the call.

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 only payload parameter is a free-form object with additionalProperties=true, so the description is the only place field expectations could be conveyed — yet it says nothing. An agent gets no hint about which Question fields the body accepts or what id refers to.

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?

"API endpoint for Question CRUD" only names the resource; it never says this endpoint updates a Question, and "CRUD" is a family label that could equally describe questions_create, questions_destroy, questions_list or questions_retrieve. Against siblings like questions_partial_update (also present) the definition gives the agent no basis for choosing.

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 statement of when to use this tool, no distinction between full update (PUT-style) and questions_partial_update (PATCH-style), and no prerequisites or exclusions mentioned. The agent must infer usage purely from the tool name.

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