update_mcp_config

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses the core behaviors: modifying active settings and optionally persisting to config.toml. However, it lacks details on potential side effects, permissions needed, error handling, or reversibility of changes.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the key action in the first sentence. No redundant or unnecessary information, making it efficient and clear.

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 simple config update with one nested parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the main behavior. However, it could be enhanced by mentioning what happens when save_to_file is false, or the return value/status.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds context by mentioning 'active settings' and 'persist', which aligns with the 'updates' and 'save_to_file' parameters, but does not significantly elaborate beyond the 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 'Update Server Configuration Values' and 'Modify active settings', specifying the verb (update/modify) and resource (server configuration). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_mcp_config, reset_mcp_config, and export_config_file.

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 implies usage for updating configuration and optionally persisting, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like export_config_file or reset_mcp_config, nor any prerequisites or limitations.

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