ops_set_home_recommendations

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the partial update behavior and the need for a reason, but does not mention side effects, rate limits, or the nature of the replacement (e.g., whether existing modules not in the input are preserved). The description is partially transparent.

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 two sentences long and directly conveys the core behavior. It is efficient, though the first sentence could be slightly clearer about the replacement nature. No wasted words.

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 tool's complexity (nested objects, 3 parameters, no output schema), the description explains the key behavior (partial replacement) but lacks details on submodule semantics, return value, or error states. It is adequate but not complete.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions workspace_code implicitly ('for a workspace'), modules ('supplied home recommendation modules'), and reason ('Requires a reason'), but provides no detail on submodule structure (banner, platform_recommendation, hot_ranking) or the format of the reason. This adds minimal value beyond the schema's parameter names.

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 verb ('Replace') and resource ('home recommendation modules for a workspace'), and distinguishes the operation as a partial update ('Omitted modules are preserved'). It is distinct from sibling tools like ops_get_home_recommendations (read) and ops_preview_home_recommendations (preview).

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 when to use this tool (to replace recommendation modules) and mentions a prerequisite ('Requires a reason'). It does not explicitly list when not to use it or compare to siblings, but the context of sibling names provides some guidance.

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