auth_settings

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It indicates mutation ('Update') and an auth requirement ('Requires service_key'), but lacks details on side effects, reversibility, or permissions beyond service_key. Acceptable but minimal.

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?

Single sentence with no waste; includes all essential information (action, fields, prerequisite). Front-loaded and efficient.

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 no output schema, the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., success confirmation or updated settings). For a simple mutation tool, this might be sufficient, but additional return value info would improve completeness.

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%, and the description lists the fields but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses 'Update project auth settings' with a list of specific fields (allow_password_set, preferred_sign_in_method, public_signup, require_passkey_for_project_admin), clearly identifying the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_auth_user or set_user_password by focusing on project-level configuration.

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?

Mentions the prerequisite 'Requires service_key' but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_auth_user for user-level changes). The context is implied but not fully articulated.

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