Change Photo Code

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

The description discloses a real side effect not present in annotations: the entire website is republished on every call. That is valuable, especially with openWorldHint=true indicated by the annotations. However, it omits what 'replace' means for the previous code, whether the republish is immediate and visible to visitors, and what permissions are required.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the primary action and its consequence are both stated up front. It is arguably under-specified rather than verbose, so brevity is not the issue.

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 presence of an output schema relieves the description of explaining return values, and the republish side effect is covered. But for a site-altering write with a single undocumented, nullable parameter, the agent lacks enough to call it correctly when code is omitted.

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?

There is a single optional parameter with 0% schema description coverage, so the description carries the full burden and does not meet it. It never explains the 'code' parameter: what language/format is expected, size limits, or critically what a null default means (clearing the custom code vs. leaving it untouched).

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 verb 'Replace' plus the specific resource 'site-wide photo editing code' and the explicit side effect 'republish the complete website' make the operation unambiguous. It is distinguishable from publish_site and configure_website by pairing a code replacement with the mandated republish, though it never names those siblings outright.

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?

Nothing states when this should be used rather than configure_website or publish_site, nor whether the republish is unconditional or only triggered by a change. An agent must infer that this is the right tool for photo-code customization rather than site publishing.

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