define_custom_rule

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It reveals 'Pro+ only' and pattern/action options, but fails to disclose key behaviors such as required permissions, idempotency, side effects, or the fact that it creates a rule (write operation). Incomplete.

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 very concise (two bullet points), but it sacrifices completeness by ignoring three out of five parameters. While brevity is positive, under-specification reduces usefulness for an agent. Structure is minimal.

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 5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and an output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain required parameters, output format, or error conditions. Significant gaps remain, making it inadequate.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage. The description adds meaning for 'pattern' (regex, case-insensitive) and 'action' (block|escalate|log), but omits three required parameters (tenant_id, rule_name, api_key). Agent lacks understanding of essential inputs.

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 'Define a tenant-specific detection rule', including a specific verb (define) and resource (tenant-specific detection rule). It is distinguishable from siblings like list_rules (listing) and scan_log (scanning), making the purpose 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions 'Pro+ only' as a constraint but does not explain appropriate contexts or exclusions. No explicit reference to sibling tools or when-not-to-use.

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