Update Settings

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false, and openWorld=true, so the description needs to add context about what a non-idempotent, open-world update actually does. It adds nothing — no statement of partial-vs-full replacement, no mention that unspecified settings are left untouched (or reset), no permission or return info. All it contributes is the word "Update."

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 padding, which is good for front-loading, but it is under-specified rather than concise — the brevity comes at the cost of saying anything useful.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but for a mutation tool flagged non-idempotent and open-world the description is incomplete: it should clarify partial-update behavior and scope (user-level notification prefs, not workspace/profile). Nothing an agent needs to invoke it safely is stated.

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% and the nested settings object documents all three boolean fields, so the schema carries the parameter meaning. The description adds no syntax, format, or merge semantics beyond what the schema already provides; baseline 3 applies.

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 generic verb+resource ("Update user settings and preferences") but never says what kind of settings — the schema reveals they are notification email toggles, which the description omits. No differentiation from the nearby sibling update_profile, so an agent cannot tell the two apart from the text 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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus alternatives such as update_profile, nor any stated prerequisite. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and its one parameter.

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