Update soundboard sound

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description is not required to state that it mutates data. It adds that the tool modifies 'name' and 'volume', but does not disclose potential edge cases like whether both fields must be provided, what happens if the sound does not exist, or other side effects.

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 is immediately clear and front-loaded with the action. It contains no filler or redundant information.

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 simple update tool, the description covers the core operation, but it lacks guidance on important invocation details, such as the requirement to specify a target sound (though 'sound' is in the schema) or that name/volume are optional updates. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 50% (only 'guild' and 'sound' have descriptions). The description mentions 'name' and 'volume' as the mutable fields but adds no further meaning about constraints, requiredness, or the fact that at least one of them should be provided. It does not compensate for the gap in 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 explicitly states the tool renames a soundboard sound or changes its volume, which clearly identifies the action and target resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_soundboard_sound, delete_soundboard_sound, and list_soundboard_sounds.

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: use this tool when you need to rename or adjust the volume of an existing soundboard sound. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives like create or delete tools, so guidance is only implicit.

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