update_local_cell

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Replace' which implies mutation, but does not specify if the operation is destructive, whether it preserves other cell attributes, or any error conditions (e.g., if the cell is not found). No permissions or side effects are mentioned.

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 very short at one sentence, which is concise. It front-loads the verb 'Replace' and the resource. However, it might be too terse, but it still earns its place as there is no extraneous information.

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 that the tool has 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value, what happens if the cell index is invalid, or if the path is incorrect. More context is needed for an agent to use it 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. It mentions 'source' and 'cell_type' but does not explain 'path' or 'index' parameters, leaving them entirely to the schema names. The description fails to compensate for the low coverage.

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 states 'Replace a cell's source and optionally its type,' which clearly indicates the verb (replace) and resource (cell's source and type). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_local_cell' and 'delete_local_cell' by focusing on modification. However, it doesn't explicitly mention that the cell is in a local notebook, though the tool name implies this.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'add_local_cell' or 'delete_local_cell.' There is no mention of prerequisites, context for usage, or exclusions.

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