update_knowledge_article

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false), non-destructive (destructiveHint=false), and idempotent (idempotentHint=true). The description adds a requirement (WRITE_ENABLED=true) but does not disclose further behavioral traits like whether the update is partial or full, or side effects on related data.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys purpose and a key requirement. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, with no superfluous words.

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 there is no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., the updated article or a success indicator), but it does not. Additionally, with many similar siblings, it lacks guidance on when to use this tool over others. The description is incomplete for a tool with two required parameters and no output schema.

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%, and both parameters have descriptions. The description itself adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. The example in the schema (e.g., {'text': '...'}) is helpful, but the description does not compensate for any lack in schema details.

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 the verb 'Update' and the resource 'knowledge article', distinguishing it from many sibling tools that operate on other entities. The requirement 'requires WRITE_ENABLED=true' adds specificity.

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 mentions a precondition (WRITE_ENABLED=true), providing some guidance on when the tool can be used. However, it does not explain when to choose this tool over alternatives like update_record or update_any_resource, nor does it give context on when not to use it.

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