update_text_attributes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It only states 'Update' without disclosing side effects, permissions, or that it modifies an existing text item. The required text_id implies existing resource, but this is not explicit. Insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 concise sentence, but it is too minimal to provide sufficient guidance. It states the purpose without elaboration. While not wasteful, it doesn't earn its place fully.

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 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't describe return values, error conditions, or default behavior. The agent lacks context for successful invocation and understanding 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, and the description adds no additional meaning to parameters. Parameter names (bold, italic, size_mm, rotation_deg) are self-explanatory, but the description does not explain units, ranges, or that null means no change. Fails to compensate for lack of schema descriptions.

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 'Update text formatting attributes' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_text_value, update_text_position, and add_text by focusing on formatting attributes.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the tool name and purpose imply its use for formatting changes, and siblings exist for other modifications. Implicit guidance but no exclusions.

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