update_article

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and reveals critical side effects: PUT overwrites excerpt/coverImage/authorName, cover image loss detection blocked unless skipValidation, slug stability, tag behavior, and 403 ambiguity. This is highly transparent.

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 efficiently structured with main action first, then key warnings, but is somewhat long. Every sentence adds value, though some could be more concise.

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 (8 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers error cases, side effects, and parameter behaviors thoroughly, making it complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 coverage is low (13%), but the description adds meaning for slug resolution, content field behavior, skipValidation, and tags. However, parameters like site, title, and contentFile are not explained, leaving some gaps.

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 tool updates an article, explains resolution via slug and PUT endpoint, and differentiates from publish_article by noting it is not an upsert. This distinguishes it from sibling 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?

Explicitly states when not to use (no article exists) and provides an alternative (publish_article). Also describes behavior for tags and error ambiguity.

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