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

Openly describes modifying/clearing data and notes that file-type fields cannot be set via MCP, which is consistent with destructiveHint=true. It does not mention irreversibility, but the destructive nature is conveyed.

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 concise sentences with no filler; each sentence adds necessary operational context.

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?

Covers required inputs, clear/update semantics, read-tool discovery, and a key limitation. No return-value details are provided, but no output schema exists and this is a write operation.

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?

All parameters have descriptive schema text, and value encoding for checkboxes, dropdowns, and null-clearing is explained in detail. There is a slight inconsistency between the required array and the prose requirements, but the field-level descriptions compensate.

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?

Description states a specific action ('Set or clear') on a specific resource ('client custom-field value') and points to the read tool for discovering definitions, so its 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?

Provides usage details: required identifiers, null-clearing behavior, and the file-type-field limitation. It does not explicitly discuss alternative write tools for unsupported fields, but the guidance is clear enough.

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