bookshelf_update_config_ui

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'WRITE: this modifies your Bookshelf instance,' which clarifies the side effect and scope (instance-level modification). This is consistent with annotations and adds minor context, but it does not disclose specifics such as authentication requirements, immediacy of changes, or potential impact on existing configuration.

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 (two sentences) and front-loaded with the primary action. However, while it is not verbose, it is under-specified: the first sentence adds little beyond the tool name, and the second sentence is a generic warning. It lacks the necessary detail to be considered well-structured for effective use.

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 that the tool has a mutable config UI, a required id, and a free-form body object, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the id identifies, what fields the body can contain, what the output looks like (despite having an output schema), or how this tool relates to get_config_ui and other config tools. The low schema coverage and lack of parameter guidance leave significant gaps.

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 0%, with two parameters (id and body) that are completely undocumented in the description. The description offers no explanation of what 'id' refers to or what shape 'body' should take, leaving the agent without essential information to construct a valid request. The generic body object with additionalProperties adds to the need for parameter semantics.

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's purpose: 'Update config ui.' This is a specific verb+resource ('update' + 'config ui') and distinguishes it from sibling tools like bookshelf_get_config_ui and other config update tools (e.g., update_config_host) by naming the target resource. The additional 'WRITE: modifies your Bookshelf instance' reinforces the action but does not fully explain what 'config ui' encompasses.

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 other config update tools. The description lacks context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or conditions that would call for updating the UI configuration. The WRITE warning is a behavioral note, not usage guidance.

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