update_app_settings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While '変更します' (changes/updates) implies a mutation operation, it doesn't describe permissions required, whether changes are reversible, rate limits, or what happens when only some parameters are provided. For a complex mutation tool with 13 parameters, this is inadequate.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the essential information.

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 complex mutation tool with 13 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like permissions, side effects, or response format. The agent would struggle to use this tool correctly without additional context about what 'general settings' encompasses and how changes affect the app.

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?

The schema description coverage is 77%, which is relatively high, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no specific parameter information beyond what's in the schema - it doesn't explain relationships between parameters, provide examples, or clarify which settings are most commonly changed.

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 'kintoneアプリの一般設定を変更します' clearly states the action (変更/update) and target (kintoneアプリの一般設定/kintone app general settings). It's specific about what gets updated, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like update_app_acl or update_app_customize.

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. There are many update_* sibling tools (update_app_acl, update_app_customize, update_field, etc.), but the description doesn't help the agent choose between them or indicate prerequisites like needing an existing app.

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