Update Discussion

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations (openWorldHint, destructiveHint). It does not mention that updates may overwrite fields, require permissions, or have non-obvious side effects. Given the destructive hint, the agent knows it's destructive, but the description itself contributes nothing.

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 with no filler or redundancy. It is efficiently front-loaded and fulfills its minimal purpose without unnecessary detail.

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 an 8-parameter mutation tool with a destructive hint and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It lacks context about update behavior (e.g., partial updates, required permissions, how missing fields are handled) and does not compensate for the absence of usage guidelines. The schema covers parameter details but not the operational context.

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%, with each parameter having a descriptive label. The description itself does not add any meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for high coverage but does not enhance understanding.

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 an existing discussion topic, distinguishing it from create_discussion or delete_discussion. However, it does not enumerate which fields can be updated, relying on the schema for that detail, so it is clear but not fully specific.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_discussion or delete_discussion. The description only states the action without indicating any context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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