Update site NGINX configuration

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint: false, idempotentHint: false, destructiveHint: false. The description adds that the action replaces config and may trigger a reload/restart, which is valuable context beyond annotations. However, it does not detail potential side effects or error conditions.

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 consists of two concise sentences that front-load the primary purpose and add a crucial post-action note. Every word serves a purpose, and there is no extraneous information.

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 moderate complexity (3 required params, no output schema), the description covers the core action and post-action requirement. However, it omits details like whether the content must be valid NGINX syntax, if existing config is overwritten completely, or error handling. It is minimally complete but has noticeable gaps.

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?

Input schema covers all three parameters with descriptions (content, site_id, server_id) at 100% coverage. The description does not add additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Replace the NGINX configuration for a Ploi site,' using a specific verb ('Replace') and a specific resource ('NGINX configuration for a Ploi site'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ploi_get_site_nginx_configuration (read) and ploi_deploy_site (deploy action).

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 notes that Ploi may require a reload/restart after replacement, providing some usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to update config vs. deploy) or include when-not guidance.

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