admin_set_lease_perpetual

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: the toggle effect, inheritance to projects, reactivation for grace-state orgs, auth requirements, and the HTTP endpoint. No contradictions.

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 concise with five sentences covering purpose, effects, auth, and replacement. It is well-structured and front-loaded, though it could be slightly more compact.

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 tool's purpose, effects, auth, endpoint, and response field (reactivated). No output schema exists, but the description provides enough completeness for a mutation tool without needing to detail return values.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond schema by explaining the effect of each parameter value, including the 403 error for non-admin wallets. This enhances understanding of parameters like lease_perpetual.

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 'Toggle an organization's lease_perpetual escape hatch' with a specific verb and resource. It explains the effect and distinguishes from per-project pinning by mentioning it replaces v1.56 pin_project. This differentiates it from sibling admin tools like admin_archive_project.

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 specifies that the tool is 'Platform-admin only' and mentions the auth mechanism. It also clarifies the behavior for grace-state organizations. While it does not explicitly list when not to use, it provides sufficient context for proper usage.

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