Swagger: Update Document

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

The description claims an update operation, but the annotation sets readOnlyHint: true, creating a direct contradiction. This severely undermines transparency.

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 moderately sized but includes a redundant 'Toolset' line and a parameter listing that largely duplicates the schema. Could be more concise.

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 key type/source constraint but lacks details on return values, error conditions, or the fact that it is a mutation (contradicting annotations). Not fully complete given no output schema.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats parameter details from the schema with minimal added context, meeting but not exceeding expectations.

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 updates content or source of an existing document, supporting HTML and Markdown. It is distinct from sibling tools like swagger_create_documentation_page (create) and swagger_get_document (read).

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 explicitly lists which type/source combinations are allowed (e.g., 'html' + 'internal' cannot be edited via API), guiding when not to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives beyond the constraints.

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