yuque_update_doc

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden for a mutation tool. It discloses the underlying endpoint (PUT /repos/:id/docs/:id) and points at references/api/doc_api.md, but says nothing about whether omitted fields are preserved or cleared, whether the update is reversible, or what authorization is required.

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?

Three short fragments: action+fields first, endpoint second, reference pointer third. Front-loaded and waste-free, though the truncated fragment style makes it slightly cryptic rather than polished.

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 an 8-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin: it omits partial-update semantics, the effect of the 'raw' flag, and error/permission behavior. The external doc reference is a weak substitute for in-definition guidance.

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 100%, so both required IDs and all optional fields are already documented in the schema. The description restates the updatable field list without adding format, enum, or default semantics beyond what the schema provides (e.g. the public 0/1/2 mapping already lives in 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?

States a specific verb (Update) plus the resource (a document) and enumerates the mutable fields (title/body/slug/format/public), which clearly separates it from create_doc, get_doc and delete_doc. It stops short of naming siblings explicitly, but the purpose is 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 never says when to use this tool versus alternatives such as yuque_create_doc, yuque_copy_doc, or yuque_web_delete_doc, nor does it mention prerequisites (permissions on the repo, whether the doc must exist). Usage is only implied by the verb 'Update'.

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