Update saved view

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutating operation (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false), and the description aligns with that. It adds the specific mutable fields, but it does not disclose whether the update is partial or full-replacement, how omitted fields behave, or any side effects consistent with openWorldHint=true.

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, tightly written sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action, names the resource, and enumerates the affected aspects efficiently.

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?

For a tool with eight parameters, zero schema descriptions, and no output schema, a one-sentence summary is not sufficient. An agent can identify the tool's purpose but lacks guidance on required id, whether page_size is supported, partial-update behavior, and the expected response or side effects.

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 must compensate for the eight undocumented parameters. It groups some fields well ('sorting' implies sort_field/sort_reverse, 'visibility' implies show_in_sidebar/show_on_dashboard, 'filter_rules' maps directly), but it omits page_size and the required id parameter, and gives no detail on update semantics.

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 uses a specific verb ('Change') and names the resource ('a saved view') plus the exact aspects that can be modified: name, sorting, visibility, and filter rules. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_saved_view, delete_saved_view, and get_saved_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 wording 'Change a saved view's...' implies this tool is for modifying an existing saved view, which provides basic usage context. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state conditions for when to use this tool over create_saved_view or delete_saved_view.

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