dooray_post_log_update

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly implies a mutating operation, but it does not mention the required confirmation gate, the fact that existing content will be overwritten, or any side effects. For a write tool, this is a meaningful transparency gap.

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 a single, clear sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately concise, though it achieves brevity at the cost of omitting useful behavioral context.

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 that this is a write tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not mention the confirmation requirement, the update semantics, or what happens after execution. The schema covers parameter structure, but the broader operational context is missing.

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 high (~83%), so the parameters are largely self-documenting. The description adds little semantic value beyond the schema, except for framing the target as a 'comment or activity log.' This meets the baseline but does not elevate it.

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 a specific verb ('update') and a clear resource ('a comment or activity log of a Dooray post'), which is enough to identify the tool's core function. It distinguishes the tool from create/list siblings by the 'update' action, though it does not explicitly name any alternatives.

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 implies the tool should be used when updating an existing comment or activity log, but it offers no explicit guidance about when to prefer it over related tools like dooray_post_log_create. There are no exclusions, conditions, or alternative-selection criteria.

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