bunny_manage_edge_script_variables

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds real behavioral detail: variables are plaintext key-value pairs, secrets are encrypted and 'never returned in plaintext after creation', and the available actions include destructive operations. This goes beyond what the annotations alone convey.

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 compact, well-ordered, and every sentence earns its place: resource and purpose, semantic distinction, and action list. It is easily scannable with no 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?

For a multi-action management tool, the description covers the essential behavioral distinctions and action set. It does not describe output/responses, but there is no output schema and the annotation context provides the safety profile; the remaining details are adequately handled by the input schema and enums.

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 parameter meanings like id, name, value, action, and resource are already documented. The description adds some extra meaning by explaining variable/secret semantics and the upsert behavior, but it does not substantially enrich the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 identifies the resource ('environment variables or encrypted secrets for an edge script') and enumerates the concrete actions: list, add, update, delete, upsert. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like bunny_manage_edge_script and bunny_set_edge_script_code, making the tool's 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?

The description implies when to use it: when managing variables or secrets for an edge script. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools such as bunny_manage_edge_script or bunny_get_edge_script_code, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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