update_document_section

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

Without annotations, the description bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the need to call publish_document after editing, implying the update is not immediately visible, but does not detail other behavior like whether content is fully replaced, permissions required, or response format.

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 sentences with no redundant information. The purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence contributes essential context (what, prerequisite, follow-up 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?

For a simple update tool with 3 required params and no output schema, the description covers the core action, prerequisite (get section IDs), and post-action (publish). Could optionally mention return values, but completeness is high given tool simplicity.

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%, so the schema already describes all parameters. The description adds context for section_id ('from list_document_sections') but provides no additional semantics beyond the schema for document_id or content. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the content of an existing IT Glue document section,' which includes the specific verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools by referencing list_document_sections and publish_document.

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 instructs to use list_document_sections to obtain section IDs and to call publish_document after editing, providing clear when-to-use and post-action guidance. No alternatives needed.

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