Set bid modifiers

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false), idempotence (idempotentHint=true), and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=false). The description adds the specific mutation behavior (changing percent/enabled) but does not disclose additional traits like authorization needs or side effects.

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?

Single sentence with no filler, front-loading the verb and resource. The parenthetical '(bidmodifiers/set)' is compact and clarifies the mapping to an API endpoint.

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 update tool with full schema and informative annotations, the description covers the core behavior. It could mention that percent must be non-negative (already in schema) or note that no output is returned, but missing these is minor.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters (id, enabled, percent). The description adds no new meaning beyond restating 'by modifier id' and the actions, which are already in the schema.

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 verb ('changes'), resource ('existing bid modifiers'), and specific actions ('percent and/or enables/disables'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like add_bid_modifier (create) and delete_bid_modifiers (remove).

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 over alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance. The sibling context implies differentiation but lacks explicit direction.

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