Update AutoMod rule

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive write operation. The description adds some behavioral detail, such as that keywords are 'replaced' rather than appended, but does not disclose required permissions, rate limits, or any side effects beyond the immediate field changes.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that lists all operations without unnecessary filler. Every word adds value, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

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?

The description covers all key update actions and complements the schema and annotations well. It does not mention the return value (no output schema exists) or explicitly reference sibling tools, but the combination of description and schema is sufficient for a straightforward update operation.

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?

The description maps clearly to the mutable parameters: 'Rename' to name, 'enable or disable' to enabled, and 'replace keyword list' to keywords. This adds meaning beyond the schema, which only describes rule, guild, and keywords explicitly. However, it does not clarify the semantics of the rule or guild parameters beyond their schema descriptions.

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 uses specific verbs ('Rename', 'enable or disable', 'replace') tied to the resource ('rule'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_automod_rule and delete_automod_rule. It explicitly enumerates all supported update operations, making the tool's scope unmistakable.

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?

The description implies usage for modifying an existing AutoMod rule, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over create/delete alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool mentions are provided, so the context is only implicit from the action verbs.

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