article_update

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

Discloses that title/body/excerpt go to autosaved_* fields (not immediately public), data has merge semantics via PATCH, and calls without data use PUT. This adds context beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) without contradiction.

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?

Two well-structured paragraphs with clear grouping of information. First paragraph introduces categories and requirement; second paragraph details data field behavior. No extraneous information; every sentence adds value.

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 (autosaved vs. published, PATCH/PUT duality) and no output schema, the description covers input behavior thoroughly, including edge cases like key deletion via sibling tool. Missing return value details are acceptable for a mutation tool with annotations.

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 0% schema coverage, the description compensates by grouping parameters into autosaved vs. direct-update categories, explaining data's merge behavior, and stating the requirement of at least one field. Provides meaningful semantics beyond the schema structure.

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 states 'Update an existing article' and distinguishes two categories of fields (autosaved vs. direct) with clear roles, differentiating from sibling tools like article_create, article_publish, and article_delete_data.

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?

Explicitly explains when to use this tool: for updating article fields, with specific guidance that autosaved fields require article_publish to become public, and that data field uses PATCH semantics while non-data uses PUT. Also directs to article_delete_data for key deletion.

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