patch_template_text

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the patches format and the publish parameter, but does not cover auth requirements, error handling, or consequences of operations (e.g., overwriting text). The description is moderately transparent but lacks depth.

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 concise, front-loaded with the main action, and uses clear bullet-like structure for the patches format. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The tool has 6 parameters and an output schema (not shown). The description covers the core use case and patches format but omits details on required parameters (external_template_id, new_version, updated_by) and potential errors. While the output schema may compensate for return value info, the description alone is 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description only explains the 'patches' format and the 'publish' parameter. It does not clarify 'external_template_id', 'new_version', 'updated_by', or 'subject', leaving significant gaps for a 6-parameter tool.

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 tool modifies specific text nodes in an existing template without full rebuild, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'update_template' by emphasizing targeted edits over a full rebuild.

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 context for when to use this tool ('small copy edits') and contrasts with full rebuild, but does not explicitly name alternative tools (like 'update_template') or state 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.