vibie_update_site

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'new content' and 'same URL', implying content replacement, but does not disclose potential side effects, permissions required, or what happens to other site settings. Some behavioral context is present but incomplete.

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 sentences front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy. No fluff.

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?

Without an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage guidance, and key parameter behavior. It does not specify return values or confirmation, but given the simplicity of an update operation, the information is largely sufficient. Missing minimal context on result details.

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 100% (all parameters described in schema). The description adds value by explaining the automatic slug reading behavior from .vibie/site.json, but the other parameters (folder, note) are already clear from the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 resource (existing Vibie site), and distinguishes from sibling tools like vibie_create_site by noting this is for re-deploying or pushing changes to an already-published site with the same URL.

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?

It explicitly states when to use ('when the user wants to re-deploy or push changes to an already-published site') and provides guidance on slug handling, automatically read from .vibie/site.json or passed explicitly, which orients the agent on usage context.

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