update_navigation

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

Without annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: the menu is completely replaced, extra keys are ignored, URLs should be site-relative, and membership actions should not be included. This provides essential transparency for a mutation tool.

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 well-structured and front-loaded, with clear sections. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds value. It could be trimmed slightly without losing clarity, but overall it is effective.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but mentioned), the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage, parameter details, behavioral traits, and restrictions. No gaps are apparent.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the structure of menu items, the replacement behavior, and that passing null leaves the other menu unchanged. It also clarifies that extra keys are ignored.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's purpose: setting the blog's navigation menus (primary header and secondary/footer). It uses specific verbs and resources, distinguishing it from sibling tools like update_site_settings or others that deal with different aspects.

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 advises when to use (to set navigation menus) and when not to (membership actions should be in theme as Ghost Portal buttons). It also recommends confirming with user before calling, and strongly implies that this tool replaces menus entirely rather than appending.

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