surveymonkey_update_survey

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly communicates that this is a full replacement (PUT) and that the provided definition must be the complete new definition, implying destructive overwrite. It does not mention permissions or error behavior, but the core behavioral trait is transparent.

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 compact and front-loaded. The first sentence conveys the core operation, the second gives the routing rule, and the Args section is concise. Every sentence earns its place.

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 full-replace operation with two parameters, the description covers what the tool does, when to use it, and what the parameters mean. An output schema exists, so return-value details are not needed in the description. Minor omissions like authentication requirements or side-effect warnings are not critical given the clear 'fully replaces' language.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides meaningful semantics for both parameters: survey_id is 'ID of the survey to update,' and survey_definition is 'New complete definition (same schema as surveymonkey_create_survey).' The cross-reference to create_survey is particularly helpful given the schema's generic object type.

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 and resource: 'Fully replaces a survey's definition (PUT).' It clearly distinguishes this full-replacement update from the partial-update sibling, so an agent can tell tools apart at a glance.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use surveymonkey_patch_survey for partial updates,' which gives the agent a concrete decision rule and names the alternative. This is strong when-to-use guidance.

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