kinsta_cdn_image-optimizationConfigure CDN image optimization for a Kinsta environment by enabling lossy or lossless compression, or disabling optimization entirely.
Configure CDN image optimization settings for an environment.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| env_id | Yes | The environment ID | |
| image_optimization_type | Yes | Disable optimization or select lossy/lossless compression |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The only annotation is openWorldHint, so the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. 'Configure' implies a mutation, but the description does not disclose whether the operation is reversible, whether it requires CDN to be enabled, how existing settings are affected, or any side effects.
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, compact sentence that front-loads the action, resource, and scope. There is no redundant wording or filler, making it appropriately concise for a simple tool.
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?
With only two parameters fully covered by the schema and no nested objects, the description is minimally viable for invoking the tool. However, as a configuration and potentially state-changing operation, it lacks context about effects, prerequisites, or expected response, especially given there is no output schema.
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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds no value beyond the schema's parameter descriptions, and it does not elaborate on environment ID format or interpretation of the image_optimization_type values.
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 clear verb ('Configure'), a specific resource ('CDN image optimization settings'), and a scope ('for an environment'). It is distinguishable from siblings like kinsta_cdn_clear-cache because it targets image optimization, though it does not explicitly differentiate or describe the allowed values.
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?
No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are prerequisites or exclusions mentioned. The phrase 'for an environment' provides some context, but it does not tell the agent when this operation is appropriate or what conditions must be met.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.