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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, destructive, and idempotent behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond annotations: authentication is required, all fields are optional with partial-update semantics, and the operation is free with no coin cost.

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 compact and front-loaded, with no wasted sentences. It moves efficiently from purpose to authentication, customizable fields, update semantics, and cost.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description is largely complete: it covers authentication, partial updates, field meanings, and cost. It still leaves some parameter semantics ambiguous, especially min/max question bounds and allowed enum-like values.

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%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It enumerates the fields and gives useful constraints for passing score and questions per unit, but it does not clearly distinguish questions_per_unit_min from questions_per_unit_max or define valid difficulty and language values.

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 a specific verb and resource: update quiz generation preferences. It is distinguishable from most siblings, though it does not explicitly contrast with my_quiz_settings or create_quiz.

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?

Usage is implied by 'Update your quiz generation preferences,' and authentication is noted, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus viewing settings with my_quiz_settings or creating a quiz with create_quiz.

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