Update Section

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, consistent with a replacement operation. The description adds behavior beyond annotations by stating the heading line is preserved and defining the section scope as 'everything between a heading and the next heading at any level'.

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 with two sentences plus a parenthetical detail about the section parameter. It is front-loaded with the primary action and efficiently provides necessary usage instructions 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?

Given the tool's mutative nature and no output schema, the description adequately covers input behavior and constraints. It clarifies what is replaced and preserved. However, it does not address edge cases like missing sections, which could be inferred but not explicit.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds meaningful context: 'section' is a heading path with case-insensitive and whitespace-tolerant matching, 'newBody' is replacement content without the heading, and 'path' explicitly requires extension. This supplements the schema well.

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 replaces the body of a specific section, preserving the heading line. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'insert_at_section' by specifying it replaces content rather than inserts, and from 'replace_in_note' by targeting a section instead of the whole note.

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 advises using this tool 'instead of rewriting the whole file when you only need to update one section', giving clear context for when to choose it over alternatives. It also explains the 'section' parameter format with details on case-insensitivity and whitespace tolerance.

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