update_page

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

Beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation, the description reveals validation, dry_run default, token masking, caching, and draft_id reuse. It also states required environment variables, offering rich behavioral context for safe invocation.

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 a single dense paragraph with all essential information front-loaded. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, achieving high information density in a compact form.

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 no output schema, the description covers validation, dry run, draft-based retry, and environment prerequisites comprehensively. It addresses the tool's complexity and usage scenarios fully, leaving no significant gaps.

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?

While the input schema already covers parameters with 100% description coverage, the description adds context about source being editable from get_page output and explains the draft_id workflow, enhancing parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 overwrites an existing page's source with an edited tree, distinguishing it from create_page (creates new) and patch_page (partial updates). It also specifies source-only re-render, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explains the dry_run and draft_id workflow for validation and retries, but does not explicitly compare with sibling tools like patch_page or create_page. However, it implicitly provides guidance on when to use the dry run vs actual save.

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