thincms_update_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should fully disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions partial update and large payload handling, but omits auth requirements, rate limits, error handling, return value, or effects of updating non-existent tools.

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 very concise with two sentences, the first stating purpose and the second providing a specific usage hint. No unnecessary words.

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 complexity (15 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, error states, prerequisite steps, or integration with other tools like thincms_get_tool or thincms_list_tools.

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?

With only 47% schema description coverage, the description adds marginal value beyond the schema by noting the htmlFile alternative for large payloads. For a 15-parameter tool, more parameter guidance would be beneficial.

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 an existing Tool' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create, get, list, and delete by the action and the partial update semantics ('Only supplied fields change').

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 provides explicit guidance for large HTML payloads, advising to use htmlFile instead of html. However, it does not discuss when to use this tool versus alternatives like create or delete, which is implied by context.

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