AtlaSent — Upsert SIEM Config

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

Annotations indicate a mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds key behavioral details: 'destinationUrl must be HTTPS' (constraint) and 'credential is stored securely and never returned by GET' (security). This enriches beyond annotations.

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?

Three concise sentences. First sentence states purpose, second adds requirement, third adds constraints and security. No wasted words, front-loaded with the most important information.

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?

With 9 parameters and no output schema, the description covers plan requirements, URL constraints, and credential security. It does not describe return behavior (which an upsert might provide), but given no output schema, this is acceptable. Overall complete for an upsert tool.

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%, but the description adds meaning by specifying 'Enterprise plan required' (global context), 'destinationUrl must be HTTPS' (specific constraint), and 'credential stored securely...' (security semantics). These go beyond the schema's parameter 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 verb ('Create or update') and resource ('SIEM export configuration') with scope ('for an organization'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'atlasent_get_siem_config' (read-only) and 'atlasent_test_siem_delivery' (test only).

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 explicitly mentions the prerequisite ('Enterprise plan required'). It does not provide explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context is clear for creating or updating SIEM config. No direct comparison with siblings is given.

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