yuque_update_repo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It simply repeats the operation name and provides no information about side effects, permissions, idempotency, or failure modes. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 short sentence that is immediately clear and front-loaded. It may be too sparse to convey necessary context, but for a simple tool it is appropriately brief. The schema fills in the details.

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 no annotations, so the description is the only source of behavioral context. It does not explain the response format, whether the update is partial or full, or any side effects. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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?

The input schema describes all five parameters with clear documentation, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter syntax or usage details, so the baseline score of 3 applies. Parameter meanings are adequately conveyed by 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 clearly states the tool's function: updating a repo/book. It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create/delete/get. The mention of 'repo/book' is slightly ambiguous but consistent with Yuque terminology.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like yuque_create_repo or yuque_delete_repo. No prerequisites or differences from other operations are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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