Update agent prompt

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by revealing the read-modify-write behavior, explaining that the upstream API replaces the whole prompt, and clarifying how merge protects unmentioned sections. The destructive nature of replace mode is explicitly disclosed, which is critical and additive context.

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 dense yet efficient, front-loading the core purpose and then explaining modes with necessary nuance. Every sentence contributes, and the critical safety guidance about the merging behavior is placed up front.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and a potentially destructive replace mode, this description is complete. It covers preconditions, mode semantics, what gets preserved versus discarded, and the API behavior that motivates the merge. An agent has enough information to call the tool correctly and safely.

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?

Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3, but the description adds value by explaining the behavior of merge mode and how it relates to the sections parameter. It also reinforces the case-insensitive matching behavior and the need to call get_agent, which supports correct parameter usage beyond the raw 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 names a specific verb and resource ('Update an agent's prompt section by section') and immediately distinguishes the two operational modes. This clearly differentiates the tool from sibling tools like get_agent and list_agents, which are read-only and not prompt modification tools.

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 explains when to use merge mode versus replace mode and instructs the agent to call get_agent first to see existing section titles. This gives concrete, actionable guidance for correct tool selection and invocation.

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