update_collective

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States what it does but does not disclose whether updates are partial or full, what happens to omitted fields, or any side effects (e.g., permission change impact on members). The note about renaming is useful but insufficient.

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 concise sentences, no redundancies. First sentence states purpose and usage, second adds a key constraint. Could be more structured but efficient overall.

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 4 parameters, 50% schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, description is too brief. Lacks details on permission level valid values, return format, error handling, and differentiation from similar update tools.

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?

Adds meaning for the emoji parameter (can clear with empty string) but provides no additional semantics for editPermissionLevel or sharePermissionLevel beyond the schema, which lacks descriptions. With 50% schema coverage, description partially compensates.

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?

Description clearly states the verb (change/adjust) and resource (Collective) and specifies the modifiable fields (emoji, permission levels). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like update_page or update_tag, but the resource target is inherently different.

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?

Provides a basic usage instruction ('Provide the id and any fields to change') and notes a limitation (renaming not supported). Lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives like create_collective or delete_collective, and does not mention prerequisites or context.

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