Update Collection Rules

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It states 'Replace' and 'rebuild', implying destructive mutation, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., overwriting existing allow-list), required permissions, or potential errors. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the schema.

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?

Single sentence of 10 words, very concise and front-loaded. However, given the complexity of the nested rules object, a slightly longer description with examples or clarifications might be justified without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

No output schema, no annotations, and only a brief description. The tool has 3 parameters with a nested object, but the description does not explain how workspaceId interacts (note: workspaceId is not required, which is unusual). No information on return values, errors, or prerequisites. Incomplete for a mutation tool with this complexity.

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 description coverage is only 33% (only rules has a description). The description repeats 'replace a collection's rules' but adds no new meaning for workspaceId or collectionId. For rules, the schema already provides a description. With low coverage, the description should compensate by clarifying parameter usage, but it does not.

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?

Description clearly states the action 'Replace a collection's rules' and the outcome 'rebuild its allow-list from workspace docs'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_collection (which likely updates other properties) and add_doc_to_collection (which adds individual docs).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention when not to use it or provide context for selection among sibling tools. It assumes the agent knows this is the only way to update collection rules, but alternatives like update_collection are not addressed.

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