update_snippet

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'update' without detailing effects, return values, permissions, or whether partial updates are supported, leaving significant ambiguity for a mutation 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, concise sentence that effectively communicates the tool's scope. It avoids redundancy and front-loads the key action and resource.

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 tool is relatively simple, and the schema thoroughly documents all parameters. However, there is no output schema or behavioral notes about what the update returns or how partial updates are handled, leaving some contextual gaps that the description does not fill.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description lists the majority of parameters (name, visibility, language, runtime) but omits the required 'slug' parameter, which the schema handles. The added value over the schema is minimal.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Update a snippet's settings' and lists the specific fields it can modify. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'update_snippet_code', which handles code updates rather than settings.

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 implies usage by indicating it updates settings, which contrasts with update_snippet_code, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. The guidance is implied rather than direct.

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