update_post

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

The description implies a mutation (update), which aligns with the annotation destructiveHint: true. However, it does not add significant detail beyond the annotation—e.g., no mention of overwriting behavior, permission requirements, or irreversibility.

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 extremely concise (4 words). It front-loads the purpose but lacks structure (e.g., specifying required parameters or typical usage patterns). Could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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 and the tool being a mutation (destructiveHint: true), the description should explain behavioral aspects like whether content is overwritten, and any side effects. It does not, leaving gaps in completeness.

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 100%, with parameter descriptions for postId ('The post ID') and message ('New post content'). The description adds 'content' as context, but the schema already captures the semantic meaning, so the description adds marginal value.

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 'Update a post's content', specifying the verb (update), resource (post), and scope (content). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_post, delete_post, and other update tools (e.g., update_category), but lacks explicit differentiation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools include several update-related tools (update_topic, update_user, etc.), but the description does not mention context or prerequisites.

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