update_blog_post

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it discloses two useful traits: markdown_body is converted to PlateJS and replaces content, and publishing is blocked. It omits permissions/auth needs, whether unspecified fields are preserved (partial-update semantics), and failure behavior, leaving notable gaps 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?

Two tight sentences with the core behavior front-loaded; the markdown conversion note and publishing restriction follow logically. No wasted words, though the meta/thumbnail fields are bundled without detail.

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 an 11-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the headline behaviors but omits return/response shape and partial-update semantics, so an agent still lacks pieces needed to call it confidently.

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 only 36% across 11 params, and the description adds detail for markdown_body replacement and the status restriction, but variant_id's 1:1 link/unlink semantics, reading_time bounds, meta_keywords, and meta_description go unmentioned in the description (some are covered in the schema itself). It partially compensates for the coverage gap but not fully.

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?

States a specific verb (Update) and resource (existing blog post) and enumerates the field groups affected (title, excerpt, meta, thumbnail, body), which cleanly separates it from create_blog_post_from_markdown and update_content siblings.

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?

Gives a concrete when-not rule and an alternative: status cannot be set to 'published' here, use Studio instead. It does not, however, explain when to prefer this tool over update_content or create_blog_post_from_markdown, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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