qui_update_dashboard_settings

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only reveals that this is a PUT mutation requiring a request body. It does not explain side effects, whether settings are fully replaced or merged, required permissions, or potential consequences. This falls short of transparent mutation behavior.

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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the endpoint and concisely explains argument conventions. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool has a generic schema, no annotations, and an output schema, but the description does not compensate for missing parameter details or behavioral context. It lacks information about the request body shape, required authentication, and the exact update semantics, making it incomplete for an agent to use correctly without external knowledge.

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 is a generic 'arguments' object with no specific parameters, so the description's explanation that path variables go directly in arguments, query values in arguments.params, and body in arguments.body adds meaningful structure. However, it does not enumerate the actual path variables or body fields, leaving critical parameter details undocumented.

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 explicitly names the endpoint 'PUT /dashboard-settings' and the verb 'Call', making it clear this updates dashboard settings. It is specific enough to distinguish from the sibling 'qui_get_dashboard_settings' (read) and other update tools, though it doesn't explicitly say 'update dashboard settings'.

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 procedural instructions on how to structure arguments (path variables, query in arguments.params, body in arguments.body), which gives guidance on invocation. However, it does not state when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions, prerequisites, or the relationship to 'qui_get_dashboard_settings'.

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