Update membership question

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

Adds substantial detail beyond the annotations: existing pending requests keep the answers they already gave, the call returns all questions, and it executes without a confirmation prompt and notifies nobody. Those are exactly the mutation-side effects an agent cannot infer from readOnlyHint/destructiveHint/idempotentHint flags.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and the replacement semantics, and every sentence carries information about effects or permissions. The one flaw is the duplicated 'Admins only,' which appears twice in a short description.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by stating the return ('all questions') plus notification and pending-answer behavior. Only minor gaps remain, such as error behavior for an out-of-range question number.

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%, so field meaning is fully documented in the schema. The description's 'new text, type and answers' loosely maps to question/type/options but adds no format or constraint detail beyond what the schema already states (150-char limit, 4 options, enum). Baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Change a membership question') and immediately clarifies the semantics: it replaces one existing question with new text, type and answers. This distinguishes it from add_membership_question and delete_membership_question in the sibling list without needing the schema.

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 'Replaces one membership question' framing plus 'Admins only' tells the agent when this applies rather than adding or deleting, and who may call it. It stops short of explicitly naming the add/delete siblings as alternatives, so it is clear context rather than full routing guidance.

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