Update notification settings

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

The description adds no behavioral detail beyond the fact that settings are updated. With only idempotentHint and openWorldHint in annotations, the agent is left unaware of side effects, persistence, or how the settings apply. No contradiction, but significant transparency gap.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and contains no redundant words. It is appropriately minimal for the purpose it serves.

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 six parameters and no output schema, this description is insufficient. It omits parameter details, expected return values, and how settings combine. An agent would struggle to use the tool correctly without external documentation.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description should clarify each parameter. It only lists loose categories ('sound, show preview, mute, story mute') that map ambiguously to schema fields (e.g., 'mute' could be silent or muteUntil). Parameters like accountId and muteUntil are unexplained.

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 identifies the tool as updating notification settings for a peer, with a parenthetical listing the types of settings (sound, show preview, mute, story mute). It distinguishes from read-only tools like get_notify_settings, though it doesn't explicitly separate from mute_peer.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like mute_peer or get_notify_settings. The description only states what the tool does, not the context or preconditions.

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