Update Lucky FTP config

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

Annotations already indicate idempotent and non-destructive. The description adds that the update is a merge (partial patch) rather than a full replacement, and that secrets in the response are redacted—both useful beyond the annotations.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The core operation is stated first, and the response redaction note is a valuable addition without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

No output schema, so return behavior is undisclosed. Missing details about error conditions, permission requirements, or how patch merges are applied. For a mutation tool with limited structured metadata, the description leaves important gaps.

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 0% and the description only refers to 'partial patch' without explaining the structure or keys of the patch object. Since the patch is a nested object with no documented meaning, the description fails to compensate for the missing schema detail.

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 specific action ('Merge a partial patch') and resource ('FTP configure object'), making it clear this is an update operation. It distinguishes from read-only siblings like lucky_get_ftp, though 'configure' is slightly informal.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites such as fetching current config first, and no exclusions. The description implies usage but provides no context for decision-making.

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