edit_poll_question

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Edits' implies mutation but doesn't specify whether the update is partial or full, whether answers are affected, what permissions are required, or any side effects. This is inadequate for a mutating tool.

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, focused sentence with no redundant content. It is front-loaded and concise, though slightly under-specified for behavioral details; however, since the schema covers parameters, this terseness is acceptable.

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?

This is a multi-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema. The description only states the action without covering update semantics (e.g., partial vs full replacement), required identifiers beyond the schema, or potential impacts on related data. The schema helps but doesn't fill the behavioral 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with each parameter having a clear one-line description (e.g., 'Updated question text', 'Position/order of the question'). The description adds no additional parameter context, but the schema already provides sufficient semantics, earning the baseline score.

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 states a specific verb ('Edits') and resource ('existing question'), clearly indicating a mutation operation. Although the description alone is somewhat ambiguous, the tool name 'edit_poll_question' disambiguates it from other edit tools like edit_poll or edit_channel.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus create/delete poll question or edit_poll. There are no stated prerequisites, contexts, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name and parameter schema.

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