update_footnote

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the description adds no extra behavioral context beyond stating 'Update'. It does not disclose side effects, prerequisites, or consequences, providing minimal added 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 a single concise sentence that immediately states the core action. There is no unnecessary text, and it is front-loaded for quick understanding.

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 basic function but lacks workflow context, such as whether the file must be saved separately or if any output is returned. For a mutation tool with no output schema, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in the schema, meeting baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('footnote'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like add_footnote and delete_footnote. It is not a tautology and directly states the action.

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 does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. While the purpose is clear, it fails to mention alternatives or conditions (e.g., that it only updates text, not ID), relying on implied context from the tool name.

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