Swagger: Update Document

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

Annotations already indicate destructive and non-readonly behavior. Description adds constraints about allowed combinations but no additional side effects like what gets destroyed or authentication requirements.

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?

Description is fairly concise with a main sentence and parameter list, but the parameter list largely duplicates the input schema, making it partially redundant.

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 output schema exists, description need not explain return values. It covers purpose and constraints adequately, but lacks information about typical usage scenarios or prerequisites.

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. Description adds value by explaining the constraint that 'html' + 'internal' documents are not editable, which is not immediately clear from the schema alone.

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 'Update the content or source of an existing document' with supported content types (HTML and Markdown). This is distinct from sibling tools like create or get document tools.

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?

Description provides constraints on which document type+source combinations are editable (e.g., 'html' + 'internal' cannot be edited via API), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like create or get.

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