LightCMS

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

Annotations establish destructiveHint=true (mutation), while description adds merge semantics ('only the fields you want to change'), explains dry_run validation behavior, distinguishes clear_fields from merge updates, and details return structure ('total attempted, succeeded, failed counts') compensating for lack of output schema.

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?

Front-loaded with core purpose and sibling distinction; structured logically from operation definition → semantics → return values → workflow tip → optimization. No wasted words; each sentence advances understanding of how to invoke correctly.

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?

Despite lacking output_schema, description fully specifies return values ('total attempted, succeeded, failed counts, and per-item success/error details'). Covers batch limits (100 max, 50 recommended), destructive behavior (annotations + merge semantics), and workflow integration for a complex nested update operation.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, description adds crucial semantic context: explains merge semantics on data field vs explicit clearing via clear_fields, clarifies dry_run validates 'IDs exist without committing', and contextualizes version_comment as applying to 'all updates' in the batch.

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?

Description opens with specific verb ('Update') and resource ('content items'), explicitly quantifies scope ('up to 100'), and immediately distinguishes from sibling tool 'update_content' by stating 'Use instead of calling update_content in a loop'.

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?

Explicitly identifies when to use this tool versus alternative ('Use instead of calling update_content in a loop'), provides workflow prerequisites ('Tip: call list_content...first'), and includes performance guidance ('Recommended batch size: up to 50 per call').

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