set_default_retention

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

The [WRITE][risk=high] tag and detailed explanation of reversibility, the exception that objects written under COMPLIANCE cannot be shortened, and the refusal condition when no object lock provide comprehensive behavioral disclosure beyond the schema and annotations (which are absent).

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 well-structured with an intro line and an Args section, every sentence carries critical info, no redundancy.

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 tool's complexity and the absence of an output schema or annotations, the description covers all important behaviors, prerequisites, and side effects, making it essentially self-contained.

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?

Scores 5 because the description compensates for the 0% schema coverage by explaining every parameter: bucket_name requires object lock, mode explains GOVERNANCE vs COMPLIANCE semantics, days/years mutual exclusivity, dry_run preview, and target for MinIO config.

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?

Clearly states 'Set the bucket's DEFAULT retention' with a specific verb and resource. The term 'DEFAULT' distinguishes it from object-level retention tools like set_object_retention.

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?

Provides clear context: applies to newly written objects, requires object lock enabled, and explains undo behavior. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it.

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