update_webex_message

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the sender restriction and the requirement for at least one content field, but does not discuss idempotency, rate limits, or potential error states. The mention of a standardized response dictionary is useful but lacks detail.

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 concise and well-structured: a short summary, a constraint sentence, a requirement line, a bulleted Args list, and a Returns note. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 core functionality and basic constraints, but given no output schema, it could be more complete by describing the response dictionary fields (e.g., success flag, error details). Also, it does not mention whether edits are limited to a certain time window or if the message ID must belong to a specific room.

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 0%, so the tool description must compensate. The Args section clearly defines each parameter: message_id as required ID, text as plain text, markdown as markdown content. This adds meaning beyond the schema's bare property names and types.

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 'Edit an existing Webex message,' providing a specific verb ('Edit') and resource ('existing Webex message'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like send_webex_message or delete_webex_message.

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 specifies that only the bot or user who sent the original message may edit it, and that at least one of text or markdown must be provided. This provides clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly exclude other scenarios or name alternative tools.

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