update_config_indexer_by_id

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

Annotations already indicate idempotent, non-destructive, non-read-only behavior. The description adds beyond that by specifying the PUT method, the path parameter, and advising the agent to fetch the current resource schema before sending a body. No contradictions exist.

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 short, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every line contributes useful information: the update action, the endpoint, and parameter guidance. No filler or repetition.

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 output schema exists and annotations cover idempotency and safety, the description provides enough to invoke the tool correctly by pointing to GET/schema for body construction. It could be slightly richer about when to choose this over related update tools, but it is complete for the core task.

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 carry the parameter semantics. It clarifies that id is a path parameter and that body is the request payload, and importantly tells the agent where to discover the expected body fields (GET or /schema). This meaningfully exceeds the bare 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 clearly states the operation ('Update IndexerConfig') and provides the explicit HTTP method and path (PUT /api/v3/config/indexer/{id}). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_indexer_by_id by specifying the config indexer resource.

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 gives clear context: it is a PUT update for an IndexerConfig identified by path parameter id, and it instructs the agent to read the matching GET or /schema endpoint first to discover expected fields. It does not explicitly address alternatives, but the usage context is clear enough.

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