update_style

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It mentions updating an existing style but omits error behavior (e.g., style not found), permissions, side effects, or output details. The case-insensitivity note is about parameter input, not behavior.

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 brief and front-loaded with the main action. The bullet list for parameters is clear, though the 'Args:' formatting is slightly noisy. Every sentence contributes meaning.

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 low complexity and existence of output schema, the description still lacks usage guidelines and behavioral details. It explains what the tool updates but not when to use it or what happens under various conditions.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description adds value by explaining each parameter (case-insensitivity for name, replacement behavior for based_on and next_style). However, it does not clarify the difference between style name and styleId, or provide format requirements.

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 verb (Update), resource (existing style), and specific properties (basedOn, next). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like create_style or apply_style_to_range.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like copy_style or apply_style_to_range. The description lacks context for selection among dozens of related sibling tools.

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