set_report_settings

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

With no annotations, the description takes on full burden and does well by disclosing merge semantics, listing valid boolean and enum values, and clarifying that untouched toggles are preserved. It lacks information on return values or permissions, but the mutation behavior is reasonably transparent.

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 long but every sentence serves a purpose. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, then systematically organized into Booleans, Enums, and merge behavior, making it easy to parse without wasted words.

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 2-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description is largely complete: it covers all valid inputs and merge behavior, sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly. Minor omissions like how to obtain reportSessionId or what the response contains prevent a 5.

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 only documents 'settings' with a brief example and leaves 'reportSessionId' unexplained. The description compensates extensively by enumerating all allowed toggle keys, enum options, and the merge behavior, adding substantial meaning beyond 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 tool sets REPORT-LEVEL behavior toggles (ExplorationSettings), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by emphasizing 'REPORT-LEVEL' and enumerating the exact toggles affected.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: when changing report-level behavior toggles. It also implies exclusion of model-level settings via 'REPORT-LEVEL', but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it.

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