mempalace_update_drawer

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

The description discloses that updates trigger reindexing of changed content/room metadata, and force_reindex rebuilds unchanged chunks, providing useful behavioral insight beyond the annotations. It does not detail other side effects or permissions, but annotations already indicate mutation and no destructive hint, so this is a solid addition.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence conveys the core action and the optional reindex behavior with no wasted words. It is concise and well-structured.

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 description is sufficient for a moderate-complexity mutation tool given that the output schema exists and the schema covers all parameter meanings. It could benefit from explicit use-case guidance and side-effect disclosure, but it is not incomplete.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for all 7 parameters, so the description adds minimal extra semantic value. The only cross-reference is force_reindex, which matches the schema's 'Rebuild semantic chunks even when content and scope appear unchanged.'

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 identifies the tool as updating a drawer and reindexing changed content or room metadata, distinguishing it from sibling tools like mempalace_add_drawer or mempalace_delete_drawer. The verb 'Update' and object 'drawer' are specific and unambiguous.

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 use for modifying an existing drawer but does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives or provide exclusions. No mention of 'use X instead' or prerequisites, leaving usage context implicit.

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