update_suprsend_user_channel_preference

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

Discloses side effects (takes effect on next workflow run, in-flight notifications may still send). Explains is_restricted semantics and warns against overriding perma_status. Annotations are consistent: destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, etc. No contradiction.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (purpose, semantics, when-not-to-use, side effects). Each sentence adds value, but could be slightly more concise; still excellent for thoroughness.

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?

Covers usage, parameter semantics, side effects, return value, and limitations. Given no output schema, description specifies it returns updated channel-preference state. Fully complete for this tool's complexity.

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 100% but description adds meaning: explains the structure of channel_preferences items and the meaning of is_restricted (true blocks, false re-enables). Adds value beyond schema definitions.

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?

Description clearly states the tool blocks or allows delivery channels for one user, applied across all categories. It distinguishes from siblings like update_suprsend_users_preferences and update_suprsend_object_channel_preference via explicit 'When NOT to use' section.

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?

Explicit when to use (block/allow per user globally) and when not to use, with specific alternative tools named (per-category control, permanent invalidation, objects). Also provides use case examples.

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