clash.profiles.update_metadata

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses capability-gating, protected fields (explicitly listed as NEVER modifiable), two-phase execution, and failure mode. Could mention permissions beyond capability, but overall transparent.

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?

Three concise sentences; front-loaded with purpose, then specific constraints and process. No extraneous 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?

No output schema, but description omits return values (e.g., what preview returns, execution result). Parameter info is good, but missing expected response format reduces completeness for an agent.

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%, but description adds meaning by explaining that 'patch' only accepts allowlist fields, 'confirmed' must be true, and 'confirmNonce' comes from preview. This enriches schema beyond raw descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states the tool updates Profile metadata (non-sensitive) via authenticated native adapter, specifying the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools focused on listing, activation, and other operations.

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?

Explains two-phase process (preview then confirmed with nonce) and failure condition. Does not explicitly compare with sibling profile tools like activate or refresh, but provides sufficient context for appropriate invocation.

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