Update a snippet

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond them by specifying the blast radius ("May affect delivery, audience membership, published data or irreversible state") and reiterating the confirm gate, telling the agent what is actually at risk.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the risk disclosure and precondition. No filler and nothing that fails to earn its place.

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 non-idempotent, destructive mutation with no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies the missing pieces an agent needs: the affected domains and the confirmation requirement. It is nearly complete, with only explicit sibling routing left implicit.

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%, so all three parameters (account, confirm, snippet_id) are already documented in the schema. The description's mention of confirm=true reinforces but does not extend the schema's own note that it should be set "only when the user asked for exactly this action," so baseline 3 applies.

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 states a clear verb+resource ("Update a snippet"), which cleanly separates it from create_snippet, get_snippet, and list_snippets in the sibling set. It stops short of explicitly naming or contrasting those siblings, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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 supplies one precondition ("Requires confirm=true") which is genuine usage guidance. However, it gives no when-to-use vs. when-not context against alternatives and does not explain what scenario warrants updating a snippet versus recreating it.

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