bookshelf_update_config_naming

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

Annotations already set readOnlyHint=false; the description reinforces that it's a write operation ('modifies your Bookshelf instance'). It adds little new behavioral context beyond that, but it doesn't contradict 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 short sentences with no redundancy. The WRITE warning is useful and the description earns 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?

With zero parameter documentation, a required 'id', and a nested 'body', the description leaves the agent guessing about payload structure. It doesn't reference sibling tools or explain the configuration shape, making it incomplete 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?

Schema has no parameter descriptions (coverage 0%), and the description provides no meaning for 'id' or 'body'. The agent must guess what values to provide, making parameter usage highly ambiguous.

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 a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('config naming'), clearly distinguishing it from read-oriented siblings like bookshelf_get_config_naming. However, it doesn't elaborate on what 'config naming' entails, so it's not maximally clear.

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. It doesn't mention that bookshelf_get_config_naming is for reading or any prerequisites. The WRITE warning is a safety note, not usage direction.

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