update_livetv_dvrs_by_dvr_id

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

Annotations already establish non-read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that—it does not disclose what gets changed, side effects, authorization implications, or response behavior.

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 very concise, front-loaded with the purpose, and cleanly organizes the endpoint and argument. There is no filler or redundancy, though it is thin in content.

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 definition does not explain what 'DVR Settings' includes, what a successful update does, or whether a request body is expected. The output schema exists, but the missing payload and behavioral context leave the tool incomplete for an update operation.

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's single required parameter dvr_id already carries the title 'Dvr Id', and the description's 'The ID of the DVR' adds no meaningful new information. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate for missing parameter context but does not.

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 the action ('Update') and the resource ('DVR Settings'), but 'settings' is too generic to distinguish from sibling operations like update_livetv_dvrs_by_dvr_id_prefs, update_livetv_dvrs_by_dvr_id_lineups, or patch_livetv_dvrs_by_dvr_id. It also largely restates the tool name without specifying what settings are changed.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of when a different DVR-related operation would be more appropriate. The description only exposes the endpoint and argument.

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