Manage Queue

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and non-destructive. The description adds specific behavioral detail: 'Idempotent by name: add returns already_exists if a queue with the same name and target already exists.' This clarifies the idempotency behavior beyond the annotation. However, it does not explain enable/disable behavior or the effect of removal.

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 concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by a key behavioral note. Every word adds value; there is no redundancy or 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?

While the description covers the main purpose and idempotency, it lacks details on the return values (e.g., success/error messages for remove/enable/disable) and the dryRun parameter. Given the tool has 8 parameters and no output schema, a slightly more comprehensive description would improve completeness.

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 100%, so the schema documents all parameters. The description adds semantic value by linking 'name' and 'target' to the idempotency behavior, explaining that add with same name and target returns already_exists. This enriches understanding beyond the schema descriptions.

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 tool adds, removes, enables, or disables a queue, with a verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_queues (read-only) and other manage_* tools by specifying 'simple queue'. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with similar resource managers (e.g., manage_firewall_rule).

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 implies usage for queue management but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like manage_interface_list or manage_firewall_rule. It does not state when not to use it or how to choose among sibling tools.

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