LightCMS

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true but don't specify what is destroyed. The description adds crucial context that changing HTML layout regenerates all content using the template, explaining the scope and trigger of the destructive operation beyond the annotations.

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 sentences with zero waste: first states purpose immediately, second delivers critical side-effect warning. Every word earns its place; appropriately front-loaded with no redundant or verbose language.

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 7-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the core operation and major side effect (regeneration). Given annotations cover safety hints and schema covers all parameters, this is complete enough, though could mention ID retrieval pattern.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions HTML layout changes causing regeneration, but this information is already present in the html_layout parameter's description within the schema. No additional semantic details provided for other parameters like id, name, or fields.

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 clearly states specific verb (Update) and resource (template), distinguishing from siblings like create_template or delete_template. The second sentence adds critical scope detail about regeneration behavior.

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?

Provides an important side-effect warning (HTML layout changes regenerate content) which implies when to be careful, but lacks explicit when-to-use guidance versus alternatives like create_template or prerequisites such as needing the template ID.

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