patch_settings_search

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only says 'Update' without disclosing side effects, persistence, or default behavior for omitted fields. Minimal transparency for a mutation tool.

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 efficiently listing all fields. It's front-loaded with the action, but could be structured with brief explanations per field. Still, it's concise without redundancy.

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?

Given 10 optional parameters, no output schema, and the tool's complexity, the description lacks details on return values, success indication, or scope of changes. It is incomplete for realistic use.

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%, requiring the description to explain parameters. It lists all 10 field names but provides no details on allowed values, constraints (e.g., min/max for integers), or format for exclude_patterns. This adds little beyond the schema.

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 search settings' specifying the verb (update) and resource (search settings). It distinguishes from sibling tools like patch_settings_appearance and patch_settings_processing by focusing on search-specific fields.

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 modifying search settings but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like patch_settings_appearance or get_settings. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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