Update Buildin page

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses partial update behavior and soft-delete capability, but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, idempotency, or side effects on unchanged fields. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences—no wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose, then key behavioral note. Highly efficient.

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?

Given 5 parameters, no output schema, and nested objects, the description covers the main functionality but omits return value details and explicit differentiation from sibling tools. Sufficient for basic use, but lacks completeness for advanced scenarios.

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 high (80%), so baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining partial application of parameters and clarifying the archived parameter semantics (soft-delete). Not redundant, though could elaborate on property structure.

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?

Description clearly states the verb and resource ('Update a Buildin.ai page') and lists specific modifiable aspects (properties, icon, cover, archive/unarchive). It distinguishes itself from siblings like buildin_archive_page by offering archival as an option within the update, though not explicitly differentiating.

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?

Provides clear context for partial updates ('Only the fields you pass are modified') and mentions specific use case for archiving. However, it does not explicitly exclude use of sibling tool buildin_archive_page for sole archiving, leaving ambiguity.

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