update_tenant_settings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the merge-not-replace behavior and the gating condition for outbound sends, which is essential for safe use. It also clarifies the semantics of defaultSenderCountry. However, it does not mention permission requirements or other side effects, so it's not exhaustive.

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, with three sentences that each add value: the first states the operation and merge semantics, the second warns about gating, and the third clarifies a specific parameter's meaning. No fluff or redundancy.

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 settings update tool with no required parameters and no output schema, the description covers all key aspects: what fields are affected, the merge behavior, the gating condition, and the special meaning of defaultSenderCountry. It is sufficient for correct usage.

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 schema covers 75% of parameters with descriptions, but the description adds critical context by explaining the merge behavior and explicitly detailing the meaning of defaultSenderCountry, which lacks a schema description. This goes beyond the schema's pattern constraint to clarify its role.

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 updates workspace identity/compliance fields, with a specific verb and resource. It also explains the merge behavior (only keys passed are written), distinguishing it from a replace operation. This sets it apart from get_tenant_settings or update_organization.

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 provides practical context by explaining that legalName, physicalAddress, and defaultSenderCountry gate outbound sends (412) until all are set. It also clarifies that defaultSenderCountry is separate from recipient targeting. This gives clear guidance on when these settings matter, though it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools.

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