Update a template

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the description earns credit for disclosing the two-phase confirm behavior and the notable fact that there is no server-side dry run. It omits other mutation-relevant behavior, such as whether PATCH partially merges or replaces the template and whether omissions clear existing sections.

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?

Two dense clauses with zero filler: the operation and endpoint come first, followed immediately by the execution gate. Nothing is repeated from annotations or restated from the title.

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 write tool with nested body objects, an open-world hint, and no output schema, the preview-vs-execute contract is well covered. The main residual gap is update semantics for the nested sections array, which neither the description nor annotations clarify.

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 50%: confirm and idempotencyKey already carry their own descriptions, and the description reinforces confirm's effect. The body and id parameters are undocumented in both schema and description, and the description adds no meaning about how the nested name/sections payload is applied.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Update a template') and pins it to PATCH /v1/report-templates/{id}, which clearly separates it from reportTemplates_create, reportTemplates_delete, and reportTemplates_list. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with those siblings, but the operation is unambiguous.

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?

It states the confirm gate ('not executed unless confirm: true') and that omitting confirm returns a preview, which is real when-to-use guidance. However, it offers no alternatives or exclusions, such as when to use reportTemplates_create instead, leaving routing to the sibling names.

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