update-quiz-question

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

The description provides no behavioral details beyond the fact that it updates. The annotation only provides idempotentHint, but the description itself does not disclose whether the update is partial or full replacement, what happens if the question does not exist, or any side effects. This is a meaningful gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single, short sentence with no redundancy, making it concise and front-loaded. However, it is so brief that it under-specifies important context, though the sentence itself is not wasteful.

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?

For a tool with a nested question object and multiple required IDs, the description is too minimal to be complete. It lacks information about update semantics, error behavior, or relationship to quiz/course structure. The schema helps with parameters, but the description does not address operational context.

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 covers all four required parameters with descriptions, so the schema carries most of the parameter meaning. The description adds no additional parameter guidance, but since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Update' with the resource 'existing question in a quiz,' clearly indicating a modification operation. It distinguishes from creating or deleting by the word 'existing' and the resource type 'question.' However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like update-quiz-question-group or update-quiz.

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 mention when to use this tool instead of create-quiz-question, delete-quiz-question, or update-quiz. There is no context about prerequisites or typical workflows, leaving the agent to infer context from the tool name alone.

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