layout_update

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

Discloses idempotency and reversibility, adding value beyond the idempotentHint annotation. The description explains how to revert by calling again with previous values, matching the annotation 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?

The description is extremely concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core functionality. No unnecessary words or repetitions.

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 absence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, parameters, and behavioral traits (reversible, idempotent). It lacks details on potential side effects but is sufficient for a straightforward update operation.

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 description clarifies that 'body' is the Liquid template source and 'title' is the layout title, partially compensating for the low schema coverage (25%). However, it does not explain the 'site' and 'layout_id' parameters beyond their presence in the schema.

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 action 'update a layout' and specifies the fields that can be updated: body (Liquid template source) and title. It distinguishes from sibling tools like layout_create and layout_delete by focusing on modification.

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?

Provides practical constraints: 'At least one must be supplied' and mentions reversibility. While it doesn't explicitly compare alternatives, it gives clear context for when to use the tool.

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