update_macro

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait that actions replace rather than merge. However, it omits other traits such as idempotency, permissions, or whether partial updates are supported for title/description.

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?

Two concise sentences. First states purpose, second gives critical usage instruction. No extraneous information; every word contributes to clarity.

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?

With 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral detail (replace not merge). It could clarify that only provided fields are updated, but overall it is sufficient for a simple mutation tool within the sibling context.

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 has 100% coverage with parameter descriptions. The description adds extra value for the 'actions' parameter by explicitly stating it replaces the full action set. For other parameters, the description adds little beyond the schema, but the overall added context merits a 4.

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 states verb 'Update', resource 'existing macro', and specific fields (title or actions). It also distinguishes from create/delete/get/list macros by specifying 'update' and mentioning replacement behavior for actions.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: updating an existing macro's title or actions. Includes important guidance that actions replace the full set, not merge. Does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but context provides enough clarity.

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