update_document_section

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It communicates that the tool edits existing sections and that publishing is needed afterward, which is useful. However, it does not disclose permissions, overwrite behavior, or what response to expect, leaving some behavioral uncertainty 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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, followed by essential workflow instructions. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a simple 3-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it names the resource, explains how to obtain section IDs, and provides the necessary follow-up publish step. It does not mention response format or error conditions, but the core invocation path is well covered.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents all three parameters. The description reinforces that section_id comes from list_document_sections, but this is also already stated in the schema. It adds no significant semantic value beyond the structured fields.

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 action and resource: 'Update the content of an existing IT Glue document section.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like create_document_section and delete_document_section, so an agent can identify the right tool without opening schemas.

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 gives actionable workflow context: 'Use list_document_sections to get section IDs' and 'Call publish_document after editing.' This is clear usage guidance, though it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over create_document_section or delete_document_section.

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