seerr_create_settings_network

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 Seerr instance', which discloses that this is a write operation affecting the instance, going beyond annotations. However, it does not specify what changes occur, whether they are reversible, or if additional authorization is needed, so it's adequate but not rich.

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 compact, one sentence, and front-loaded with the key action 'Update network settings'. It includes a useful warning about the write impact. It earns a 4 for being appropriately concise, though it could add a bit more detail without becoming verbose.

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 open body schema and no parameter details, the description is critically incomplete. It does not explain what network settings can be updated, what format the body should take, or how it relates to the list network settings tool. The output schema exists but does not reduce the need for parameter semantics. This is a clear gap.

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 a single 'body' object with additionalProperties: true and no property descriptions, so schema coverage is 0%. The description provides no information about what fields should be included in the body, failing to compensate for the opaque schema. Agents have no guidance on what to send.

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 'Update network settings', identifying the specific resource and action. It distinguishes from the sibling 'seerr_list_settings_network' by implying modification rather than listing. However, there is a slight mismatch between the tool name ('create') and description ('update'), creating minor ambiguity, so it doesn't earn a 5.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like the sibling list tool or other create_settings tools. It only implies use for modifying network settings via the phrase 'Update network settings'. No exclusions or alternative references are provided.

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