Update Page

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds no extra behavioral context. It does not mention what gets overwritten, whether changes are reversible, what permissions are needed, or any side effects beyond the generic 'update' wording.

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 short sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, though the brevity means it carries very little information beyond 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?

The tool has 6 parameters, no output schema, and only a one-line description. It does not explain that course_id and page_url are required identifiers, which fields are optional, or that an update may overwrite existing content. This is insufficiently complete for a 6-parameter mutation tool.

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 input schema covers all parameters with descriptions and the schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no supplementary parameter meaning, but it does not need to compensate because the schema already documents each parameter.

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 says 'Update an existing wiki page,' which clearly identifies the verb (update) and resource (wiki page). It is distinct from create_page/delete_page via the mention of 'existing,' but it doesn't specify what kinds of updates are supported or how pages are identified, so it lacks full differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool over alternatives like create_page or delete_page. 'Existing' only weakly implies the page must already exist, but the description does not explain use cases, prerequisites, or why to choose this over the sibling tools.

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