Update Saved Search

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

Annotations already declare idempotent, non-destructive, and non-read-only behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond annotations: only passed fields change, changes are reversible, roles and locations are preserved, and no employer communication or spending occurs.

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 action is front-loaded, and every sentence contributes new information: partial-update behavior, reversibility, invariants, exclusions, and the next step. There is no redundant restatement of the schema.

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 low-complexity mutation with full schema coverage, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description provides everything needed to invoke it correctly and avoid the nearest misuse case.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description still adds useful semantics: saved_search_id comes from getmattered_list_saved_searches, name and alerts_enabled are optional and can be combined, and only supplied fields are updated.

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 states specific actions (rename, turn email alerts on/off) on a specific resource (saved search). It also distinguishes this tool from getmattered_update_job_preferences, so an agent can tell it apart from a similarly named sibling.

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?

It says exactly what to pass: saved_search_id from getmattered_list_saved_searches plus name, alerts_enabled, or both. It also gives an explicit exclusion ('Do not use it to change the job preferences') and names the correct alternative tool.

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