Update Notification Profile

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

Annotations already declare the full safety profile (not read-only, not destructive, idempotent, open-world), and the description adds nothing on top of that. It does not say what happens to omitted settings fields, whether the update is partial or full replacement, or what permissions are required.

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 a single bolded label with no substance; it is short but by under-specification rather than efficiency, so the one sentence does not earn its place.

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 a nested free-form settings object and no output schema, the description should at minimum explain partial-update behavior and the shape of settings. With annotations covering safety and the schema covering the three params, the remaining behavioral gap is large and unaddressed.

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 100%, so key, domain, and settings are already documented in the schema; the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema — notably it is silent on the opaque 'settings' object, which is the only parameter carrying real ambiguity.

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 'Update Notification Profile' is a pure restatement of the title and name, adding no verb+resource specificity beyond what 'profiles.notification.update' already conveys. It does not distinguish this from the sibling update tools (geoip.update, imap_auth.update, smtp_auth.update, users.update) in any meaningful way.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites such as requiring an existing profile, and no routing to alternatives like notification.create or notification.get. Usage is only implied by the verb 'Update'.

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