Update a VWO campaign section

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds meaningful context by stating changes 'affect what live visitors see and how combinations are reported', which goes beyond what annotations provide. However, it does not detail specific side effects (e.g., whether changes are immediately applied or require review).

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 two sentences (27 words), front-loaded with the core action, and contains no unnecessary words or repetition. It efficiently conveys the purpose and impact.

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 tool's complexity (5 parameters, nested body object, no output schema), the description provides a high-level effect but lacks details on return values or guidance on parameter usage beyond what the schema already covers. It is adequate but could be more 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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 5 parameters, so the description's role is minimal. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, such as clarifying the body parameter's flexibility. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states 'Change an existing section on a VWO campaign' and explains that sections determine page areas for variations, clearly distinguishing it from create/delete sibling tools like vwo_new_campaign_section and vwo_delete_campaign_section.

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 existing sections but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., vwo_new_campaign_section to create, vwo_delete_campaign_section to remove). No exclusions or context for when not to use it.

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