insumer_configure_settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses 'Owner only' and 'All fields optional', but lacks details on side effects (e.g., whether changes are instantly applied, destructive potential of changing discount mode), atomicity, or return behavior.

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 concise with two sentences covering the core purpose and constraints. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points for clarity) without adding length.

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 tool with 4 parameters including a nested object, the description covers basic intent and ownership but omits return value or success/error indications. Given the absence of an output schema, more context on expected outcomes would be beneficial.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond listing parameter categories, which are already well-documented in 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 action ('Update'), the resource ('merchant settings'), and the specific fields ('discount stacking mode, cap, and stablecoin payment configuration'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like insumer_create_merchant or insumer_configure_nfts by specifying the scope of settings.

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 indicates ownership restriction ('Owner only') and implies usage context for updating merchant settings. While it does not explicitly contrast with siblings, the domain is clear enough for an AI to differentiate.

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