Update ModDB mod description/metadata

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, so the description carries most of the burden and it delivers: 'description' fully replaces existing text and 'tags' replaces the whole list, plus a guarantee that unlisted fields (team members, images, status) are preserved. Missing auth/permission or reversibility notes keeps it short of a 5.

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 filler, front-loaded with the scope then the mutation semantics then the replacement caveats. Each sentence earns its place by preventing a distinct class of mistake.

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 16-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and only a minimal readOnly annotation, the description covers the destructive replace behavior that matters most. It omits error/validation behavior (e.g. url_alias letters-only) and permission requirements, leaving a small gap.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuinely non-obvious meaning by clarifying replace-vs-append semantics for 'description' and 'tags' and the Markdown format. It does not resolve the description_html precedence or the add/remove ordering beyond what the schema already states.

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?

States a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('a mod's ModDB page') and enumerates the mutable fields (description, summary, name, URL alias, links, side, tags). The scope clearly separates it from release-oriented siblings like update_release and add_mod_tags.

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?

Explains the key selection condition: use field parameters for full replacement versus add_tags/remove_tags for incremental tag changes. It does not explicitly contrast against sibling tools like add_mod_tags or get_mod, so the routing guidance is strong but not complete.

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