doc_update_block

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'PATCH' and the block-type-dependent update fields, but does not describe side effects, permissions, idempotency, or what happens on failure. The description mostly restates the tool's purpose without revealing operational behavior.

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 concise sentences with no wasted text. The first sentence fronts the action verb and resource, and the second adds a practical usage hint.

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 purpose and parameter usage but omits return values, error conditions, and any prerequisites. With no output schema or annotations, these gaps make the tool's overall behavior incomplete, though the essential update semantics are clear.

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?

The schema already documents all three parameters, and the description adds the mapping of update_text_elements to text blocks and directs other block types to use corresponding update_* fields. This goes beyond the schema's example, though it does not enumerate all possible update field 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 the tool updates a specified block's content in a Feishu document via PATCH. This specific verb+resource distinguishes it from sibling doc_* tools like doc_create_blocks, doc_delete_blocks, and doc_get_block.

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 implies this tool is for modifying existing blocks and provides guidance on constructing the update parameter (update_text_elements for text blocks, other update_* fields for other types). However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state 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.