brand_brandcode_live

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

With no annotations, the description fully covers behavioral traits: effects on other tools, cache TTL default, propagation of governance edits, and silent fallback on network failures. This provides complete safety and operational context.

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 six sentences, each serving a purpose: purpose, effects, prerequisites, usage triggers, return value, and fallback. No redundant 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?

Given no output schema, the description covers return values (current mode, cache freshness, sync token), prerequisites, tool interactions, and edge case (network failure). It sufficiently informs agent decision-making.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining each mode value ('on routes read tools...', 'off returns...', 'status reports...') and the cache_ttl_seconds parameter ('override per-call cache TTL. Default 60s. Lower = fresher, higher = less load.')

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 states precise actions: 'Enable, disable, or inspect Live Mode on the Brandcode Studio connector.' It specifies the resource ('Live Mode') and the connector, and distinguishes from siblings by listing the read-only tools that are affected when live mode is on.

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 lists user triggers ('go live', 'enable live mode', 'turn off live mode', 'is live mode on?', 'make brand reads live') and states prerequisites ('Requires a prior brand_brandcode_connect and brand_brandcode_auth'). It could improve by mentioning when not to use, but the context is clear.

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