update_settings

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

With no annotations, the description reveals a key behavior: credential fields are stripped. However, it lacks details on success/error responses or idempotency, which is acceptable for a simple update 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?

Two short sentences: first states purpose and lists 'which' options, second adds a critical behavioral note. No filler, front-loaded.

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 description covers purpose, allowed options, and a behavior note, but lacks return value information (no output schema). For an update tool, mentioning expected response would improve completeness.

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 description must compensate. It lists valid 'which' values and notes credential stripping for 'values', but does not explain the expected structure of the 'values' object for each integration.

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 tool updates an integration's settings, lists the allowed values for 'which', and notes credential handling. This distinguishes it from read-only siblings like 'get_settings'.

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 (to update settings) and lists valid 'which' values, but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives like 'get_settings'.

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