Update forum post

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

Annotations already indicate it is not read-only and not destructive. The description adds the specific actions (pin/unpin, lock/unlock, archive) but does not disclose behavioral details like permission requirements or side effects. With annotations, the bar is lower, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 sentence that efficiently enumerates possible edits. It is concise but could be improved by structuring with bullet points or clarifying the primary purpose first.

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 the actions available but omits important context such as: whether the update is partial or full replace, what is returned, and required permissions. For a mutation tool with no output schema and 7 parameters, more behavioral context would improve completeness.

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 adds context for boolean parameters (pinned, locked, archived) by explaining their effect, which the schema lacks. However, it does not elaborate on title length constraints or the meaning of 'tags' replacement beyond what the schema already describes. Given low schema coverage (43%), the description provides meaningful extra guidance.

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?

Description clearly identifies the tool as editing a forum post's attributes (title, tags, pinned, locked, archived). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_forum_post and delete_forum_post.

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 lists what can be modified but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus related tools like update_thread or edit_message. The context is clear but lacks explicit usage guidance.

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