notion_update_view

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that only provided fields change and empty fields are preserved, preventing accidental overwrites. However, it does not mention permission requirements, behavior on invalid JSON, or any side effects beyond the update itself.

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 concise sentences, immediately stating the purpose and the key behavioral rule. No filler or redundant 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?

The description covers the core update behavior and partial preservation but leaves a critical gap: it does not explain how to construct the sorts_json and filter_json strings. Given the output schema exists, the return format is covered, but the parameter formats are not.

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 has no descriptions for its 4 parameters, and the description names three of them (name, filter, sorts) in prose, mapping to name, filter_json, and sorts_json. It also clarifies that empty string values preserve the current setting, which is essential for partial updates. However, the JSON format for sorts_json and filter_json is not explained.

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 action (update), the resource (a view), and the specific fields affected (name, saved filter, sorts). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_view, delete_view, and query_view.

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 the tool is for modifying existing view settings but does not explicitly reference alternatives or provide when/why guidance. Users must infer from the word 'update' that this is for existing views, not creation or deletion.

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