patchDocumentAttachment

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

With no annotations and a description that only references an external guide, the agent learns nothing about behavioral traits such as side effects, authentication requirements, or rate limits. The tool's behavior is entirely opaque.

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 extremely brief, consisting only of a link to an external guide. While concise, it fails to convey any useful information up front, making it an under-specification rather than effective conciseness.

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, no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain return values, error handling, or the mutating nature of the operation, leaving major gaps for an AI agent.

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 provides full descriptions for all 5 parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, but the schema itself is adequate for parameter understanding.

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 only provides a link to external documentation without stating the tool's purpose. The name 'patchDocumentAttachment' hints at updating an attachment, but the description itself is insufficient, leaving the agent to infer from the name and schema.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'postDocumentItemAttachments' or other patch tools. The agent receives no help in decision-making.

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