vibo_update_section

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false, indicating mutation. The description adds behavioral traits: the need for host-edit permissions and that the operation is confirm-gated (requires confirm=true to execute). This adds value beyond annotations but could further clarify outcomes like success response.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two clear sentences that front-load the action and key constraints. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 has 7 parameters with low schema coverage, no output schema, and no description of required parameters (eventId, sectionId), the description is adequate but leaves gaps. It does not explain partial updates, the preview behavior when confirm is false, or mention the two required IDs.

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 low (43%), and the description only lists fields without adding semantic details or constraints. For example, 'name' and 'description' lack schema descriptions and the description provides no clarification. The 'confirm' parameter's critical role is mentioned as 'confirm-gated' but not explained as in the schema.

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 verb 'Edit' and the resource 'timeline section', listing the specific editable fields (name, time, note, description). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vibo_add_song_to_section or vibo_comment_on_section.

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?

Mentions 'Subject to the section's host-edit permissions' and 'Confirm-gated', providing context on when the tool can be used (requires permissions) and the confirmation requirement. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.

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