components_update_properties

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It merely says 'Update' without disclosing side effects, permissions, return values, or whether properties are replaced incrementally or wholesale. The localization context adds some meaning but lacks behavioral 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 a single, direct sentence that communicates the core purpose without any waste. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is incomplete. It does not explain return behavior, update semantics, locale requirements, or any constraints. The schema covers parameters well, but the missing context makes it hard for an agent to anticipate results or side effects.

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?

All parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds little beyond the schema. It references localization and locales, but does not clarify parameter formats or relationships beyond what is already in the schema.

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 action ('Update') and resource ('component properties') with a specific purpose ('for localization'). It distinguishes from likely content updates, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like components_update_content.

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 usage for localization scenarios ('customize behavior in different languages') but provides no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives. Related sibling tools exist, so more explicit differentiation would improve this.

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