Update setting

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. 'Update' implies mutation, but it does not specify whether it overwrites or merges, if changes are reversible, or any side effects. This is insufficient 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 too short (4 words) and lacks necessary detail. Conciseness should not come at the expense of completeness; it is under-specified for a tool with 3 parameters and no annotations.

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 the complexity (3 parameters, nested object, no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain the effect, return value, or any contextual details that would help an agent use it correctly.

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%, so the description must compensate. It only mentions 'name' implicitly, but does not explain 'meta' or 'value'. The meaning of 'value' (any type) is unclear, and 'meta' as an object with additional properties is opaque.

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 verb 'Update' and resource 'setting', indicating the tool modifies a configuration setting by name. Among sibling tools, many target specific resources (proxy host, stream, user), but this is a generic update for settings. It does not differentiate from those siblings, so not a 5.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_setting or other update tools. No context about prerequisites, required permissions, or typical scenarios.

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