update_publication_readme

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It indicates mutation but omits side effects, permissions, validation rules, or error behavior. The preservation of other fields is noted, but essential details are missing.

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, direct and without redundancy. It front-loads the action and immediately clarifies the partial update behavior, making it efficient.

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 simplicity (2 required params, output schema exists) and sibling context, the description covers the high-level action. However, it lacks parameter details and deeper behavioral transparency, making it minimally adequate.

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 0%, yet the description adds no explanation for either parameter (publication_id or readme). It only mentions 'readme markdown' generically. The description provides no added semantics beyond the parameter names.

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 the action (replace) and the resource (publication's readme markdown). It distinguishes from siblings like get_publication_readme and other update_publication_* tools by specifying it updates only the readme.

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 explicitly says it's a partial update preserving other fields, providing clear context. It implies when to use this tool versus updating other fields, though it does not name alternatives explicitly.

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