Update document

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The phrase 'Only provided fields are changed' is valuable because it reveals partial-update semantics that are not obvious from the schema alone. However, it does not mention permissions, reversibility, or how nested properties are merged or replaced.

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 one front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the operation, the target, the affected fields, and the key partial-update behavior efficiently.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this is adequate but minimal. It covers the core operation and the partial-update rule, yet it leaves out explicit usage guidance, return/response expectations, and any error or authorization context that would help an agent invoke it confidently.

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 every parameter already has a description in the schema. The description adds the meaningful patch-like semantic that only provided fields change, but it does not go beyond what the schema and that sentence already convey.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Update document') and enumerates the exact affected attributes: title, content, and/or property values. This clearly distinguishes update_document from create_document, get_document, delete_document, and the comment tools.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided, and sibling tools are not named. Usage is implied by the verb and resource rather than stated, so an agent must infer that this is for modifying an existing document rather than creating or deleting one.

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