update_user_config

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

The description discloses automatic type conversion of values and use of dot-notation paths, but fails to specify other behaviors such as error handling, persistence, or what happens if the key does not exist. With no annotations, the description partially carries the burden.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus parameter details. Every sentence adds value, with the purpose front-loaded and a clear structure.

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 simple two-parameter update tool, the description covers the key behavioral aspects but omits details on return values (despite output schema existing), idempotency, and error cases. It is minimally adequate.

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 description adds essential meaning beyond the bare input schema: it explains the 'key' format as a dot-notation path with concrete examples, and clarifies that 'value' strings are auto-converted. Given 0% schema description coverage, this fully compensates.

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 a user's personalization setting' with a specific verb and resource. There are no sibling tools with similar functionality, so differentiation is not required.

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. There are no prerequisites, context, or when-to-use instructions provided.

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