Set a privacy setting

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

Annotations provide openWorldHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds the key behavioral trait of replacement (overwriting existing rules) and explains how allowUsers/disallowUsers modify the base policy. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action, no redundant wording. Every sentence contributes to understanding the tool's behavior.

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 core behavior is covered, but the description omits details about the key parameter's specific options, accountId's purpose, and return value. Since there is no output schema, a bit more context would be helpful.

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 description explains mode and allowUsers/disallowUsers, adding meaning beyond the schema, but fails to describe key and accountId. With 0% schema description coverage, this is partial compensation, leaving important parameters 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 uses a specific verb 'Replace' and clearly specifies the resource: 'privacy rules for a key'. This distinguishes it from the read-only sibling get_privacy and from other setter tools (e.g., set_notify_settings) by focusing on privacy policies.

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 implies usage for setting privacy rules, providing clear context about the mode and exception parameters. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives or mention exclusions, such as 'use get_privacy to read current rules'.

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