Manage Mangle Rule

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by mentioning the idempotency key and dry-run mode, disclosing key behaviors beyond the annotations. However, it does not elaborate on the confirmationToken or immediate effects of destructive actions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action and key features. No wasted words. Efficient and clear.

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?

For a tool with 19 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral aspects (actions, idempotency, dry-run). The schema covers parameter details. Completeness is adequate but could mention how match criteria parameters relate to actions.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it mentions 'comment' and 'dryRun' but these are already documented. No new parameter insights.

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 verb ('Add, remove, enable, or disable') and resource ('firewall mangle rule'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'list_mangle_rules' or 'manage_firewall_rule'. It also mentions key features (idempotency key, dry-run mode).

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 does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions idempotency and dry-run but lacks comparisons with sibling tools like 'list_mangle_rules' or 'manage_firewall_rule'. Usage is implied but not clarified.

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