conduyt_update_dialer_settings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well: it discloses the admin/settings scope, clarifies that omitted fields are left unchanged ('Send only the fields to change'), and states the return value ('Returns the policy as saved').

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 front-loaded with purpose and admin scope, then moves to partial-update guidance and parameter notes. It is dense but well-organized; the parameter list is somewhat redundant with the schema but still readable.

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?

For a five-parameter mutation with no annotations and no output schema, it covers the essentials: purpose, permissions, partial-update semantics, and return value. Minor gaps remain around reversible effects or concurrency, but overall it is complete enough for confident 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 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters. The description mostly repeats schema details (ranges, enums) without adding meaning beyond what is already in the input 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 states a specific verb ('Change') and resource ('the account's Smart Dialing policy'), distinguishing it from the read-only counterpart conduyt_get_dialer_settings and from per-view settings like conduyt_update_smart_view_dialing.

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?

It provides a call-level instruction ('Send only the fields to change') and notes an admin scope, but never explicitly says when to use this tool versus related siblings such as get_dialer_settings or update_smart_view_dialing.

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