phabricator_blog_edit

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavior. It only explains the create/edit mode switch and the name requirement. It does not disclose side effects, permissions, or what happens during an edit (e.g., whether existing fields are overwritten). This is minimal transparency for a 10-parameter 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 only two sentences, front-loading the main purpose and key usage condition. Every sentence contributes essential information without redundancy.

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 the tool has 10 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It lacks details on default behavior, validation, or interactions between parameters. The context is incomplete for an agent to use the tool reliably without additional inference.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that name is required for creation, which is not explicitly stated in the schema. However, it does not elaborate on other parameters beyond their schema descriptions.

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 'Create or edit a Phame blog,' specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like phabricator_blog_post_edit by focusing on blogs, not posts.

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 provides clear guidance on when to create vs edit by omitting or providing objectIdentifier. It explicitly states that name is required for creation. However, it does not compare with other tools or mention when not to use this tool.

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