infomaniak_manage_drive_settings

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, etc.), the description discloses 'Two-phase confirmation with a fresh settings snapshot guard,' which is important mutation behavior. This tells the agent to expect a confirmation step and staleness protection. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a critical behavioral caveat. No 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 tool with an output schema and action enum, the description covers the purpose and a key behavioral detail. It might benefit from stating the need for a prior action to get the confirmation_token, but 'two-phase' hints at it. Overall sufficient for initial selection.

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 description's mention of AI, share-link, office, and preferences maps to the action enum, and 'two-phase confirmation' implies the confirmation_token parameter. However, it doesn't explain the settings payload structure or how to obtain the token, and schema coverage is only 50%, so description partially compensates.

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 'Update kDrive AI, share-link, office, or preferences settings,' specifying the verb and resource categories. It distinguishes from read-only siblings like get_drive_settings but doesn't explicitly contrast with more specific update tools like update_drive_share_link.

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 implies use for updating these settings types, but doesn't provide explicit when-to-use vs alternatives. Given sibling tools include specific update tools, an exclusion note would help, though the general context is present.

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