yaaif_skill_update_module_files

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits itself. It does explicitly warn that the tool can delete as well as create/update, which is meaningful destructive-behavior disclosure. However, it omits nearly everything else: auth requirements, side effects, overwrite semantics, reversibility, or what happens on failure.

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 short and front-loaded, but 'via skill_update_module_files' is redundant with the tool name and does not earn its place. This is under-specification disguised as conciseness, not efficient communication.

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 tool with three undocumented parameters, one of which is an opaque nested object, and no output schema or annotations, this one-sentence definition is woefully incomplete. It cannot support safe invocation, error handling, or correct argument construction.

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 0%, and the description adds no parameter-level meaning. The 'arguments' parameter is a free-form object with additionalProperties allowed, yet the description gives no hint about its expected shape, keys, or relationship to module files. An agent cannot construct a valid call from this definition.

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 concrete action set ('Create/update/delete') and a clear resource ('skill module files'), so the basic purpose is understandable. However, the trailing 'via skill_update_module_files' is self-referential and adds no differentiation from close siblings like yaaif_skill_write_file or yaaif_skill_edit_section.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as yaaif_skill_write_file, yaaif_skill_edit_section, or yaaif_skill_create. No context, prerequisites, or exclusions are provided, so an agent cannot decide between this and related skill-file tools.

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