update_event_display_settings

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'update', implying mutation without stating partial-update semantics, validation, side effects, or permission requirements. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single efficient sentence with a clear verb and object, front-loading the core purpose. It earns its place but is under-specified for a tool with no annotations or parameter guidance.

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 tool is simple with only 3 parameters and an output schema, so the description covers the basic purpose. However, missing behavioral details like whether omitted booleans are left unchanged, whether event_id must reference an existing event, and any preconditions leave notable gaps for an agent.

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%, and the description does not compensate by explaining parameters. The only added meaning is that 'display settings' maps to the show_start_time/show_end_time fields, but the schema titles already convey that. No additional semantics are provided.

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 a specific verb ('update') and resource ('display settings for an event page'), distinguishing it from more general tools like update_event. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with get_event_display_settings, so it's clear but not fully differentiated from siblings.

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 intended usage is implied by the verb and object: use this tool to modify display settings for an event page. But no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are mentioned, so the agent must infer context from the tool name and sibling list.

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