chat_update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It fails to disclose any behavioral traits: whether the update replaces or appends, if permissions are needed, rate limits, or idempotency. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand side effects.

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 extremely concise (three words), but brevity without substance is not beneficial. It is front-loaded but lacks necessary details, making it minimally adequate in structure.

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?

Given 10 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description is far from complete. It does not explain return values, parameter constraints, or any usage context. The tool is likely a complex mutation, yet the description provides no actionable guidance.

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 0% for 10 parameters. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, which only provides names and types. Critical parameters like 'channel', 'ts', 'text', 'attachments', and 'blocks' are not explained, leaving the agent without usage context.

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 the verb 'Update' and resource 'message', which is clear but very generic. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like chat_delete or chat_post_message. Among many chat_* tools, this description lacks specificity about what aspects of the message can be updated.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., message ownership, time limits) or situations where other tools like chat_post_message or chat_delete are more appropriate.

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