Update notification settings

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=false). The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as whether changes are instantaneous, require certain permissions, or have side effects. It merely restates the action without enriching understanding.

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 short but contains redundancy: 'Update notification settings.' is repeated in two consecutive sentences. The third sentence about the API endpoint is useful. It could be more concise by merging the first two sentences.

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 complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, many siblings), the description is incomplete. It does not explain optional parameters, default behavior, or response format. No connection to related tools like retrieve current settings. The agent lacks information to use this tool effectively.

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?

With only 25% schema description coverage, the description does little to explain the purpose of parameters like emailEnabled, notificationsToSend, and previewNotificationsEnabled. The ownerId description in the schema says 'workspace' which is inconsistent with the tool's owner focus. The description adds no semantic value beyond 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?

The description clearly states the tool updates notification settings for a specific owner, and mentions the API endpoint. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'render_retrieve_owner_notification_settings' (GET) and 'render_patch_service_notification_overrides' (service-level) by specifying 'owner'. However, it does not explicitly compare itself to any sibling.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as retrieving current settings first or understanding that this is a PATCH operation (partial update). No context on prerequisites or success conditions.

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