editStory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the authorization requirement (can_manage_stories business bot right) and the success outcome (returns a Story object), which are useful behavioral facts beyond what the name alone conveys. It does not detail whether the edit irreversibly replaces content, but the action is stated clearly.

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?

Three concise sentences with no filler: the operation is front-loaded, followed by the required permission and the return type. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a 7-parameter edit operation with nested objects and no output schema, the description supplies the important operational scope, the permission precondition, and the return type. The schema already documents parameter semantics, so the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage: every parameter, including business_connection_id, story_id, content, caption, parse_mode, caption_entities, and areas, has an explanatory description. The tool description adds no parameter-level detail, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema fully documents parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Edits') and a precise resource ('a story previously posted by the bot on behalf of a managed business account'). This clearly identifies the operation and distinguishes it from sibling story tools like postStory, deleteStory, and repostStory without needing to open the schema.

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 provides clear context: use this when editing an existing story that the bot previously posted, and it states a hard prerequisite (can_manage_stories business bot right). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it misses the top score.

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