update_chime

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral disclosure burden, but it only states 'Update settings' without describing mutation effects, permission requirements, whether settings are merged or replaced, reversibility, or failure behavior. The examples hint at what changes but not their implications.

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 compact and well-ordered: one clear purpose sentence followed by concise parameter notes. Every line adds useful information, and the required-parameter sourcing hint is placed where it is easy to act on.

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?

All three required parameters are explained, the resource is clear, and the output schema exists so return-value documentation is not needed. The main gap is the lack of behavioral detail (e.g., whether updates are partial or full) and no enumeration of valid settings keys, but for a simple update operation the description gives an agent enough to make a correct call.

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%, so the description compensates meaningfully: it explains that host accepts a console name, ID, or composite ID (MAC:numericId), that settings is a key-value map, and that chime_id must come from list_chimes. It does not enumerate all valid setting keys, but it provides concrete examples and format guidance beyond the bare 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 names the exact action ('Update settings') and the specific resource ('a Protect chime'), with concrete examples ('volume, ringtone, etc.'). This clearly distinguishes it from read-only chime tools like list_chimes/get_chime and from update tools for other device types.

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 gives clear context: it is for updating Protect chime settings. It also tells the agent how to source the required chime_id from list_chimes, which is practical usage guidance, though it does not explicitly discuss when not to use this tool or name alternative tools.

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