Update General Settings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explains that changes affect the pre-live environment and require deployment, which are critical behavioral traits not evident from the schema. It does not mention authentication or rate limits but covers the key side-effect.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and immediately follows with crucial deployment guidance. Every word adds value with no 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?

The tool has 14 parameters and an output schema exists. The description is short but sufficient given the rich schema documentation. It covers the essential workflow (update then deploy), though it could briefly mention that all parameters except app are optional (already in 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter-level information beyond what the schema already provides. Each parameter is well-described in the schema, so no further detail is needed from the description.

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 the tool updates general settings of a kintone app, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like kintone-deploy-app by noting changes are to the pre-live environment. The verb 'update' and resource 'general settings' are specific and unambiguous.

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 provides clear context that changes are made to the pre-live environment and instructs users to execute kintone-deploy-app afterward. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives for other settings updates.

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