Update Edgeless Block

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

The description transparently discloses the partial-update merge behavior for x/y/width/height, the replacement behavior for background, and the fact that non-applicable fields are returned under 'ignored'. This goes beyond the minimal annotations and is valuable for an agent deciding on impact.

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?

Three concise sentences, each packed with meaning: purpose, merge semantics, and ignored-field behavior. No fluff or repetition, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 moderate complexity of partial updates and the output schema, the description covers all essential behavioral aspects: what merges, what replaces, and how inapplicable fields are handled. No significant gaps remain beyond what the schema and annotations already provide.

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?

Despite only 50% schema description coverage, the description thoroughly explains the undocumented x/y/width/height parameters (merge with current xywh) and clarifies the background format and block flavour constraints. This effectively compensates for the schema gaps.

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 uses a specific verb ('Partially update') and resource ('note/frame/edgeless-text block by id'), clearly distinguishing it from other update tools by naming the exact block types. It also explains the merge behavior, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 context for when to use the tool (updating edgeless blocks with partial semantics) but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. The mention of specific block flavours implies the scope, but lacks an explicit exclusion of other block types or tools.

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