lsp_update_runtime_config

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

Discloses key behaviors: immutable keys are rejected, changes lost on restart. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Missing details like side effects, error handling, or auth requirements.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose. No wasted words. Efficiently conveys critical info.

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?

Adequate for a mutation tool with one parameter. Covers immutability and volatility. No output schema, but return value not described. Could mention success indicator or validation scope.

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 coverage is 100% (single config object). Description adds value by explicitly listing 'server commands' as immutable beyond schema's mention of workspacePath. Provides behavioral context for the parameter.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Update' and resource 'runtime configuration in memory'. Adds specificity by mentioning immutable keys and non-persistence. Distinct from sibling tools like lsp_get_config.

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?

Implies usage when updating runtime config, but lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives (e.g., lsp_get_config for reading). No when-not or exclusion criteria beyond immutable keys.

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