set_discovery_tips

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explains the parameters but does not disclose behavioral traits like persistence, side effects, or required permissions. For a settings tool, more transparency about the impact of changes would be beneficial.

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 concise, consisting of a one-sentence overview followed by a structured list of parameters. Every sentence adds value. It could potentially be even more streamlined, but it is well-organized and easy 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 simple tool (3 optional parameters, no annotations, low complexity), the description adequately explains the parameters and the main purpose. It does not mention the return value or side effects, but the presence of an output schema partially mitigates this. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for a settings tool.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description's 'Args' section provides clear, detailed meanings for all three parameters (enabled, power_user, snooze_days). This fully compensates for the missing schema descriptions and adds significant value.

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 action ('Adjust') and the resource ('feature-tips preference'), and explicitly identifies it as a user control. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'discovery_intro' or 'next_discovery_tip', which serve different purposes.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'discovery_status' or 'next_discovery_tip'. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context for choosing this tool.

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