mcp_qwen_set_config

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. Updating config implies a mutation, but the description does not mention persistence, side effects, validation, permission requirements, or whether changes apply immediately. This is a significant gap for a write operation.

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 a single sentence that is compact and front-loaded: the verb and resource appear first, followed by the parameter list. There is no filler or redundant information.

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 config-mutation tool with five parameters and no output schema, this description is insufficient. It does not explain what the parameters mean, how they interact, what a successful result looks like, or what side effects might occur. The agent would need additional knowledge to call it confidently.

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%, so the description must compensate. It only lists the parameter names (mode, apiKey, apiBaseUrl, model, cdpPort) without adding meanings, types, defaults, or constraints beyond what the schema field names already convey.

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 a specific verb ('Обновляет' / updates) and resource (MCP server configuration parameters), listing the affected fields. It clearly communicates what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate from the read-only sibling get_config other than by the verb.

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 intended usage is implied by the description: use this tool when you need to update MCP server config parameters. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it, nor any mention that get_config should be used for reading current settings.

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