Update Policy Window

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true. The description adds behavioral details: partial update semantics, case requirements for status and recurrence, and specific rrule validation grammars. No contradiction with 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?

Description is concise yet detailed, front-loading the main purpose. Each sentence adds value, especially the specific rrule format constraints. Slightly lengthy but justified by complexity.

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 13 parameters, 2 required, no enums, and output schema existence, description covers critical update semantics and rrule constraints. Missing some context like need for valid window_uuid, but overall adequate for moderately complex 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 0%, so description must compensate. It adds meaning for key parameters: dtstart (required), status (lowercase), recurrence (lowercase), rrule (specific grammars). However, it does not describe other parameters like window_uuid, org_uuid, etc., which are self-explanatory but still needed. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Update an existing maintenance window', specifying the verb 'update' and the resource 'maintenance window'. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like create_policy_window and delete_policy_window by indicating it updates an existing window and mentions partial updates.

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 notes that only dtstart is required and other fields are optional for partial updates, implying usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance or prerequisites.

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