Edit a text media asset

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

Discloses that editing saves a new version and archives the prior copy, which is critical behavioral info beyond annotations. Annotations already indicate non-read-only and non-destructive; description reinforces non-destructive archival behavior.

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 concise sentences efficiently cover purpose, operations, archiving, and alternatives. No redundant or filler content; front-loaded with key action.

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?

Covers what the tool does and key behavioral aspects, but lacks mention of required parameters (project, name) in description, and does not explain return value or error conditions. Given 6 params and no output schema, more contextual information would improve usability.

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?

Description lists operations (find/replace, append, prepend) but does not detail parameters like 'project' or 'append'/'prepend' semantics. Schema covers 50% of parameters with descriptions; description adds context but does not fully compensate for undocumented parameters.

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?

Clearly states verb 'edit' and resource 'text/report asset', enumerates operations (find/replace, append, prepend), and mentions versioning and archiving. Explicitly distinguishes from image editing tools, effectively disambiguating from siblings.

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?

Provides explicit alternative for image types ('use refine_media or image generation instead'), guiding when not to use this tool. Lacks mention of other potential text editing tools among siblings, but the directed alternative is helpful.

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