update_post

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds one meaningful detail—local sanitization before sending—but largely repeats the schema's sanitization notes and does not explain important behaviors such as partial updates, permission requirements, effects on published vs. draft posts, or result/error behavior.

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 tight sentence that front-loads the primary action and resource before adding the sanitization note. There is no wasted wording or irrelevant 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 a mutating tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is under-specified. It does not explain whether the update is partial or full, what happens when only some fields are provided, how visibility interacts with publish/draft status, or what the tool returns—and it gives no guidance to distinguish it from closely related sibling tools.

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 100%, so the parameters are already well-documented. The description adds minimal extra semantic value beyond repeating 'by slug' and 'sanitized', which is also present in the schema; the schema-description baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Update') and the resource ('an existing DayBy post by slug'), so an agent can identify the core operation. However, it does not differentiate this tool from siblings like edit_draft or update_article, leaving some ambiguity about which updating tool to use.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use update_post versus the sibling tools (e.g., edit_draft, publish_post, update_article). The description only says what the tool does, not when it should be selected over alternatives or what conditions apply.

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