snippets_update

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a non-destructive write. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say whether the update replaces the whole snippet or merges, whether the snippet is validated/applied to nodes, or what permissions are required.

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?

At two words it is not bloated, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness — there is no front-loaded context for the agent to act on. The brevity costs more than it saves.

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 tool with an opaque array parameter, no parameter descriptions, no output schema, and only safety-hint annotations, the description is wholly inadequate. An agent cannot determine what a valid call looks like or what the update affects.

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 supplies no parameter meaning. The `snippet` parameter is an array of objects with empty properties and additionalProperties, so its shape is completely unexplained; `name` is constrained by a pattern and length but never described. The description marginally implies name-as-identifier and snippet-as-payload but no more.

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?

"Update snippet" restates the tool name with no additional specificity: it does not identify what a snippet is, what fields can be changed, or how it differs from siblings like snippets_create or snippets_sync. It is a bare verb+resource with no sibling differentiation, placing it just above a pure tautology.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as snippets_create for new snippets or snippets_sync. The only hint is the weak implication of "Update" that an existing snippet is being modified, which the agent must infer.

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