update_testers

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

Discloses destructive behavior (full replacement, lost access) and behavior of empty lists for emails and google_groups. Slight lack of response details, but sufficient for safe usage.

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?

Concise and well-organized: clear purpose, warning, and structured argument list. No unnecessary fluff.

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 purpose, usage, parameters, and behavior adequately. Lacks mention of output or success confirmation, but given the tool's nature, it is almost complete.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining parameter meanings, defaults (track: 'internal'), and effects of empty lists. Includes an example for package_name.

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 'Replace the tester list for an internal or alpha track,' specifying the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_testers.

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?

Explicitly warns about full replacement and advises to call get_testers first to preserve existing testers, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance with an alternative.

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