edubase_patch_exam_settings

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait: it only copies settings that are not yet configured, meaning it avoids overwriting existing configurations. This goes beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true) and clarifies the tool's non-destructive, selective nature.

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?

A single, compact sentence that captures the tool's core behavior without any fluff. It is front-loaded with the action and immediately states the key constraint, making it easy for an agent to parse.

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?

Given the rich input schema, annotations (including idempotent and non-destructive hints), and presence of an output schema, the description is sufficient. It explains the exact operation and scope, and no additional context appears necessary for correct invocation.

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?

Input schema has 100% parameter descriptions, so the schema already covers parameter meaning. The description only adds the overall operation and does not elaborate on specific parameters beyond what the schema provides, which meets the baseline for full coverage.

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 uses the precise verb 'Copy' and names the resource 'settings from another exam', specifying the exact scope: only those not yet configured in the target exam. This clearly distinguishes it from other exam settings tools like edubase_post_exam_settings or edubase_put_exam_settings, which imply full writes.

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 implies a clear use case: when the target exam has some settings unconfigured and you want to inherit them from a source exam. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use this tool or mention alternatives (e.g., using put_exam_settings for full overwrite), leaving some inference to the agent.

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