pws_set_commentary_defaults

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is covered. The description adds the dual modes 'PREVIEW OR SET' but does not clarify what preview does vs set, nor the need for 'confirmed' to commit changes. This is a behavioral gap beyond what annotations provide.

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 a single, focused sentence that is easy to parse. It front-loads the action ('PREVIEW OR SET') and includes key constraints (up to four, brand or event) without any wasted words.

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 tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain how preview/confirmed work, how contractIds relate to commentators, or the exclusivity of brandId/eventId. An agent would struggle to invoke the tool correctly without additional information.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It provides some context: 'up to four' maps to contractIds maxItems, and 'brand or event' maps to brandId/eventId. However, it leaves preview and confirmed entirely unexplained, and contractIds is not explicitly tied to commentators. The description only partially compensates for the schema's lack of 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 states the tool's function: preview or set up to four default commentators for either a brand or an event. It uses specific verbs ('PREVIEW OR SET') and identifies the resource ('default commentators'), distinguishing it from all sibling tools that deal with other entities.

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 the tool (when setting or previewing commentator defaults), but it does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusions. It also fails to mention the workflow of previewing first and then confirming the actual set, leaving the agent to infer this from parameter names.

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