update_settingModify an OpenCart store setting by specifying its group, key, and value. Use this tool to change configuration values directly.
Update an OpenCart setting.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| key | Yes | ||
| group | Yes | ||
| value | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.7.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it adds nothing beyond the name. It does not state whether the update replaces or merges values, what permissions are required, whether changes are reversible, or what side effects occur on a mutation.
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?
A single short sentence with no waste and the action front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise, conveying almost nothing beyond the title.
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 mutation tool with no annotations, no schema descriptions, and no usage guidance, the description is far too thin. The presence of an output schema excuses it from explaining return values, but it still omits the operational context an agent needs to invoke it correctly.
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 0% across three required parameters (group, key, value), and the description supplies no meaning for any of them. The agent cannot tell what a 'group' or 'key' refers to or the expected value format.
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?
States a clear verb (update) and resource (OpenCart setting), so the action is identifiable. However, it does not differentiate from sibling mutation tools such as update_j3_setting, update_product, or update_seo_url, leaving the agent to infer scope from the name alone.
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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as update_j3_setting or get_settings. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.