preview_edit

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

Description explicitly states 'without changing the page', which clarifies the non-mutating nature of the operation despite readOnlyHint=false. It also discloses the need for prior read_page call and the complete post-edit page return, providing useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 tightly written sentences: the first states the core function, the second gives the essential workflow. No fluff or repetition; information is front-loaded and directly actionable.

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 the presence of an output schema and clear annotations, the description covers the critical workflow steps (read_page, preview, submit_edit). It lacks explicit error handling or edge-case guidance, but for the intended use it is sufficiently complete.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining that page_id and line IDs come from read_page's top-level page and lines[].id. This helps agents understand how to populate parameters, though it doesn't detail operations structure beyond what schema already defines.

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 tool's purpose with specific verb 'preview' and resource 'explicitly requested edit', and explicitly notes it does not change the page. This distinguishes it from related tools like submit_edit and preview_new_page.

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 clear workflow: first call read_page to get page ID and line IDs, then preview, then inspect before submit_edit. This gives strong usage context and sequencing, though it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it versus sibling preview_new_page.

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