content_partial_update

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral details: PUT body is flat, update is idempotent, and the requirement for at least one field. No contradiction with annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and includes only essential details. 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?

For an update tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: function, idempotency, flat body requirement, and field constraints. It omits error handling or auth requirements but is generally 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 50% (body and metainfo have descriptions in schema). The description adds context about the flat PUT body and the requirement to supply at least one of the two optional fields, but does not explain the `site` or `content_partial_id` parameters beyond being required.

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 verb 'Update' and the resource 'content partial', defines what content partials are, and distinguishes this from sibling tools which target different entities. The HTTP method and endpoint are also mentioned.

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 critical usage constraints: at least one of `body` or `metainfo` must be supplied, and the operation is idempotent. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or 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.