Update Product Page Experiment

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

Annotations provide idempotentHint and destructiveHint, and the description adds context about supported actions (rename, start, stop, etc.). However, it does not elaborate on behavioral traits beyond the mentioned actions, such as side effects or prerequisites.

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 sentence that efficiently states the tool's capabilities without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the primary actions.

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?

The description covers the basic purpose but lacks details on parameter usage, state transitions, and required fields. Given the tool has four parameters and no output schema, more complete context would be helpful for an agent.

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 must compensate, but it only vaguely maps actions to parameters. It does not explain the meaning of the state enum values (e.g., which ones correspond to 'start' or 'stop') or the required experimentId. The trafficProportion parameter is mentioned but not detailed.

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 that the tool can rename, start, stop, complete, or change traffic for a Product Page Optimization experiment. It uses specific verbs and identifies the resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create or list.

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 correct usage for updating an experiment but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create or list). It lacks exclusion criteria or 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.