updateSection

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the update is partial or full replacement, what happens if the sectionId does not exist, or if there are permissions required. The description is too terse to guide an agent on side effects.

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?

Very concise with two sentences (English and Japanese). No unnecessary text, but additional critical details could be added without sacrificing conciseness.

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 the tool updates a section in a test management system, the description lacks details on prerequisites (existing section), return value, and mutability behavior. With no output schema or annotations, the description should provide more context for a safe invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, providing descriptions for all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

Clearly states 'Updates an existing section', specifying both the verb (updates) and resource (section). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like addSection (create) and deleteSection (delete).

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. Usage is implied as modifying an existing section, but no exclusions or criteria for choosing over other tools like moveSection or updateSuite.

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