update_news

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, destructive, idempotent mutation, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description adds the useful partial-update rule that omitted fields remain unchanged, but it does not explain what destructive changes occur, permissions required, or the preview-then-confirm behavior that the schema handles separately.

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 short sentences with no filler, and the key partial-update rule is front-loaded immediately after the purpose.

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 schema and annotations together cover the parameters, limits, and destructive nature, but the description remains thin for a destructive update tool. It does not mention the approval/preview flow or permission considerations, leaving the agent to rely entirely on schema and annotation hints.

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 baseline is 3. The description contributes only the omission semantics (omitted fields stay unchanged), while all specific parameter details such as character limits, clearing with empty strings, and confirm behavior are already documented in the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource (update a news entry), which clearly separates it from create_news, delete_news, list_news, and get_news. It does not explicitly name a sibling, so it stops short of a 5.

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 implies use when modifying an existing news entry and clarifies partial-update behavior. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use versus when-not-to-use guidance, no mention of the preview/confirm workflow, and no alternatives.

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