Update a published Hashnode post

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

The description adds behavioral context with 'Only provided fields are changed', clarifying that unspecified fields remain untouched, which is valuable beyond the annotations. It complements the readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false by indicating partial-update semantics without contradiction.

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 well-structured with a clear first sentence and a formatted Args list. However, the Args section duplicates schema information, making it longer than necessary. The 'Only provided fields are changed' note adds value, and the overall structure remains easy to scan.

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 tool has no output schema, and the description does not explicitly state what the operation returns (e.g., updated post object or success message). While the 'response_format' parameter hints at output format, it lacks clarity on the return value. The description covers input parameters well but leaves the response ambiguous.

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%, and the description's Args section largely reiterates the schema without adding new semantic meaning (e.g., no examples, no constraints on tag slugs). It provides a minimal convenience by referencing where to obtain post_id, but does not exceed the baseline for fully documented schemas.

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 ('Update') and a clearly defined resource ('fields of an already-published post'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like hashnode_update_draft which target drafts. The phrase 'already-published' is crucial for disambiguation.

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 clearly states the tool operates on already-published posts, which guides the agent on when to use it versus draft-focused siblings. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide exclusion conditions beyond this scope.

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