update_setting

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. 'Update' implies mutation, but no details about side effects, permissions, idempotency, or what happens if the setting doesn't exist are given. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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?

While very short at three words, the description is overly terse and fails to provide necessary context. Conciseness should balance brevity with informativeness; here, it sacrifices understanding for brevity.

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 tool has 3 parameters (one nested object) and no output schema or annotations, the description is insufficient to fully understand its behavior. It should mention what type of setting is updated, possible side effects, and return value.

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 description covers all 3 parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It does not clarify the role of 'meta' or acceptable values for '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 'Update a setting' clearly states the action and resource, but it is vague; it does not specify the type of setting or differentiate it from other update tools like update_user or update_proxy_host. The verb 'update' is appropriate, but the resource 'setting' is too generic without additional context.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description gives no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_setting for reading, list_settings for enumeration). No prerequisites or typical scenarios are mentioned.

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