update_acl

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

No annotations provided, so the description must cover behavior. It explains add/remove with 'delete' flag and 'propagate' for child objects, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., overwriting, idempotency), authorization needs, or error scenarios.

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 structured with a brief opening and a clear bullet list for parameters. It is efficient, though the initial line could be slightly more concise by omitting repetition.

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?

With 7 parameters and an output schema indicated, the description covers all parameter meanings and usage rules (add/remove, propagation). However, it lacks explanation of partial updates, conflict handling, or return value, which the output schema may partially address.

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 fully compensates by detailing all 7 parameters with format, examples (path), defaults (users, groups, tokens empty; propagate true; delete false), and mandatory fields (path, roles).

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 states 'Add or remove ACL entries (permission assignments)' which clearly identifies the tool's verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like get_acl (read-only) or create_role (role management).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_role, get_acl). The description implies usage context through parameter details but lacks when-not or exclusionary statements.

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