update_faq

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=false, which is consistent with an update. The description adds that all three fields must be supplied, implying partial updates are not allowed—a useful behavioral trait beyond annotations. However, it does not detail effects like overwriting existing data or idempotency.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. It contains no filler, though the em dash is slightly informal. The information is concise and to the point.

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 no output schema, so the description should explain what the tool returns or any side effects. It does not. Additionally, it omits error conditions, preconditions (e.g., FAQ must exist), and how the update affects list_faqs or other reports.

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 only 25% (only faq_entity_id described). The description lists the three fields but provides no semantics or constraints beyond their names. It fails to compensate for the low coverage, leaving agents without understanding of what 'question', 'answer', or 'display_order' mean.

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 'Update an existing FAQ', indicating the action (update) and resource (FAQ). It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_faq and remove_faq through the verb 'update', though it does not explicitly differentiate.

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 provides the constraint that all three fields must be supplied, which is a usage guideline. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_faq or remove_faq, nor does it mention prerequisites like needing a valid faq_entity_id.

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