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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. The word 'attempt' suggests uncertainty, and 'contained decoy boundary' hints at a sandboxed environment, but side effects, authorization requirements, or outcomes are not explained.

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 extremely short (one sentence), but it sacrifices essential details. It is under-specified rather than concise, omitting critical information about the tool's operation.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain return values, error conditions, or the practical implications of 'decoy boundary', leaving the agent without necessary context.

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?

The input schema has one parameter 'service' with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not mention the parameter or clarify its meaning (e.g., which service, required format).

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 action 'rotate' and the resource 'synthetic service credential', making the purpose understandable. However, the phrase 'contained decoy boundary' is vague and may confuse an AI agent about whether this is a real operation or a test.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling tools have different intents (inspect, list, query, read), but the description does not specify the context or prerequisites for rotation.

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