Update Page Property

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

Annotations already indicate a writing, non-destructive, idempotent operation. The description adds the version_number constraint ('must be current version + 1') which is important for optimistic concurrency, but it does not explain the result of a version mismatch or other side effects.

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 compact and front-loaded with the action, using an efficient list to document parameters without redundancy. Each 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?

With 5 required parameters and no output schema, the description covers all inputs and the versioning constraint. However, it omits return values, error behavior on version conflict, and any possible side effects, despite openWorldHint being true. It is sufficient but not fully 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 description includes an Args section that explains all five parameters, fully compensating for the 0% schema description coverage. version_number receives a crucial semantic constraint, adding significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 states 'Update a content property on a page' with a specific verb and resource. It is implicitly distinguishable from sibling tools like update_page and update_page_title, though it does not explicitly call out the distinction.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_page_property or update_page. The description only provides the operation and args, leaving usage context to be inferred.

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