Update Notification Preferences

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

Annotations already mark this as mutating and destructive, but the description adds critical nuance: partial updates preserve unmentioned categories, categoriesJson can only set overrides, and resetCategories removes them. It also lists valid categories, enriching behavioral understanding beyond the annotation flags.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, then the behavioral details. No filler or redundant phrasing; every sentence contributes actionable 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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, both parameters, valid values, and edge-case behavior (override semantics). An agent has all the information needed to call it correctly, including the list of acceptable categories.

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 covers both parameters at 100%, but the description adds meaning by explaining the relationship between categoriesJson and resetCategories: one sets overrides, the other removes them. This goes beyond the schema's basic type definitions and clarifies the intended usage.

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?

States a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('notification preferences'), clearly distinguishing from read operations like get_notification_preferences. Scope is explicit ('YOUR'), and it lists valid categories, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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?

Provides strong usage context: categories not mentioned keep current settings, and resetCategories drops overrides. This implies when to use each parameter and contrasts with read tools, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives. The guidance is clear enough for an agent to decide when to invoke it.

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