add_control

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention potential side effects, error conditions for invalid input, or return behavior. Examples only hint at syntax but not operational transparency.

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 concise and well-structured. The purpose is stated in the first sentence, followed by relevant examples in a code block. Every sentence contributes meaning without 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 simplicity of the tool and presence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context for basic usage. However, it could be improved by mentioning that control rules can be viewed with 'get_controls' or deleted with 'delete_control'.

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 description adds moderate value beyond the input schema, which has 0% coverage. Examples illustrate the format of 'control_string', but 'network_id' is only described as 'Session id', which is vague. Overall, partial clarification.

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's purpose: 'Add a new simple control rule.' It uses a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('simple control rule'), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'delete_control' and 'get_controls'.

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 provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only gives example control strings, but no context about prerequisites or when to choose 'add_control' over other control-related tools.

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