ts_acl_set

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

No annotations provided, so description fully covers behavioral traits: write operation requiring WritesEnabled=true, validation before apply, ETag-based concurrency, bypass option, auth scope, and audit envelope emission.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose and prerequisites, no wasted words, efficient structure.

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 output schema present, description doesn't need to detail returns. Covers all critical aspects: prerequisites, concurrency, validation, auth, and audit. Complete for a complex mutation tool.

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%, but description adds value: clarifies policy_json replaces entire policy, explains if_match auto-fetch, and labels allow_overwrite_concurrent as dangerous.

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 states 'Apply (POST) a full ACL policy to the tailnet' with specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like ts_acl and ts_acl_validate.

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?

Explicit requirements (TAILSCALE_WRITE_ENABLED=true, token scope), optimistic concurrency behavior, and allow_overwrite_concurrent guard are detailed. Does not explicitly advise when to use ts_acl_validate first, but implies validation occurs.

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