brand_brandcode_live

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

Despite no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: live mode refreshes read tools from hosted runtime with configurable cache TTL, governance edits propagate automatically, return values include mode, cache freshness, and sync token, and network failures silently fall back to local mirror. This covers all critical behavioral aspects.

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 (7 sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Each sentence adds necessary information: purpose, effect when on, governance, prerequisites, triggers, return values, fallback. No redundancy or filler.

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 absence of an output schema, the description explains return values. It covers prerequisites, failure behavior, and parameter configuration. The tool has moderate complexity, and the description provides sufficient context for an agent to use it correctly.

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 the cache TTL default (60s) and its purpose, and contextualizing the mode parameter's effect on read tools. This extra context justifies a score above baseline.

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 enables, disables, or inspects Live Mode on the Brandcode Studio connector, with specific verbs and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by detailing its effect on read-only tools, making its unique role unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly provides usage triggers like 'go live', 'enable live mode', etc., and lists prerequisites (prior brand_brandcode_connect and brand_brandcode_auth). This guides the agent on when and how to invoke the tool, with no ambiguity.

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