bricks_update_page_seo

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses partial update behavior but omits details such as whether an update with no optional fields is valid, what permissions are needed, or rate limits. The behavioral disclosure is adequate but incomplete.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and efficiently lists what it supports. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 description does not mention return values or error conditions, which is a gap since there is no output schema. It also fails to differentiate this tool from similar siblings like bricks_update_page or bricks_seo_bulk_update, limiting contextual completeness.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for each of the 14 parameters. The description adds an overview of supported features but does not provide additional semantic value beyond what the schema already offers.

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 SEO meta data for a WordPress page' and enumerates supported fields such as title, description, OG/Twitter overrides, canonical URL, robots, and focus keyword. It distinguishes this tool from sibling read tools like bricks_get_page_seo and analysis tools like bricks_seo_analyze.

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 explicitly notes 'Partial update — only provided fields are changed,' guiding agents that unspecified fields remain unchanged. It provides clear context for usage but does not mention when not to use or how it differs from bricks_update_page or bricks_seo_bulk_update.

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