sanity_patch

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

There are no annotations, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions partial update and write token requirement, but fails to disclose potential destructive effects, atomicity, or concurrency behavior. The description adds minimal value beyond the basic purpose.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences, containing no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the primary action and followed by the essential prerequisite.

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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and 17 siblings, the description is too minimal. It does not explain how partial update works, the role of each parameter, or how to choose this tool over sanity_update, making it incomplete for effective use.

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 adds nothing beyond the schema; it does not explain parameter syntax, relationships, or usage constraints. Thus, it scores at the baseline.

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 clearly states the tool does a partial update on a document, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like sanity_create or sanity_delete, but does not explicitly differentiate from sanity_update, which likely performs full updates.

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 only guidance is 'Requires write token,' which is a prerequisite. There is no information on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as sanity_update (full update) or sanity_publish, leaving the agent without clear context.

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