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

Annotations only give readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true; the description adds the substantive behavioral detail: partial-edit semantics, the user-confirmation requirement for commitment increases, refusal conditions, timeZone non-persistence with UTC default, and that no manual Scan is triggered. This goes well beyond what the hints convey.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then constraints, then return/retry behavior. Almost every sentence is functional, but the run-on clauses around timeZone and the somewhat vague 'After uncertainty inspect get_scan_config before retrying' could be tightened.

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 prerequisites, exclusions, parameter interactions, confirmation requirement, persistence behavior, and return semantics, and an output schema already exists so return details need not be expanded. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly is missing.

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 50%, and the description compensates meaningfully: 'frequency and enabled are partial edits: omission preserves each setting' and the timeZone clause adds that it is not persisted and only affects the next-run calculation. It adds real semantics beyond the schema, though siteId's meaning is left entirely to the 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?

States a specific verb and resource plus scope: 'Edit a brand Site's automatic Scan schedule.' It explicitly distinguishes itself from get_scan_config (read first) and trigger_scan ('this call does not trigger a manual Scan'), so an agent can route correctly without opening schemas.

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?

Gives an explicit prerequisite (read get_scan_config first), clear exclusions (Topics are refused; a timezone-only edit is refused), and a required operating condition (confirm with the user before enabling or increasing recurring commitment). The alternative and the conditions that select it are named.

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