jekyll_token_update

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that it modifies project files and supports dry_run, but does not explain what happens when the token is absent (append vs overwrite), reversibility, or any permission/confirmation requirements.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the core action leads and the dry_run note trails. Efficient, though each sentence is terse enough to leave gaps.

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?

For a file-mutating tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the mutation and dry_run but omits the append-vs-update distinction, path resolution, and error/return behavior an agent would need to invoke it confidently.

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 coverage is 75%, with the required file/name/value documented in the schema. The description adds only that dry_run is supported, without clarifying its behavior (preview vs no-op), so it does not meaningfully exceed the schema baseline.

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+resource ('Update or append a design token declaration in an SCSS/CSS file') and clearly distinguishes it from siblings like jekyll_token_list and jekyll_token_get. The 'update or append' phrasing leaves the exact mutation semantics ambiguous, keeping it short of a 5.

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 guidance on when to use this versus jekyll_token_list/get or a potential create tool, and no prerequisites stated. 'Prefer CSS custom properties' is a format preference, not a when-to-use condition.

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