Update a ModDB release

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. It adds genuinely useful behavior beyond the schema: the uploaded file can never be replaced, and version edits are restricted to non-game categories. It lacks auth/permission requirements and error behavior, so not 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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the mutable-field scope front-loaded ahead of the short cross-field constraint. Nothing is padded or repeated.

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 5-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the important semantics: what can change, what cannot (the file), and the minimum input requirement. Missing only permission/prerequisite and failure-mode guidance, which is a minor 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the 'at least one of' constraint (not enforced by the schema) and the non-game limitation on version, adding marginal value but no syntax or format details beyond 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?

States a specific verb (Update) and resource (release) and enumerates exactly which fields are mutable: changelog, game_versions, and version. The parenthetical 'non-game mods only' qualification and the immutability of the uploaded file implicitly separate it from upload_release and retract_release.

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?

Gives a concrete invocation rule — 'Provide at least one of changelog / game_versions / version' — which tells the agent when the call is valid. It does not name sibling alternatives (e.g. use upload_release to change the file) or state exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

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