Write data to OPA

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states 'Write or replace' but does not specify idempotency, whether the operation creates intermediate paths, or what happens to existing data at the path. The mention of 'JSON' is helpful but insufficient for understanding side effects or error conditions.

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 just two sentences, each carrying essential information. There is no extraneous text. The first sentence states the action, and the second adds a critical detail about the request format. This is appropriately concise.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description should provide more context about the tool's behavior, such as return values, error scenarios, and whether the tool is idempotent. The current description only covers basic purpose and format, leaving the agent to guess about outcomes.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds that the body is sent as JSON, which reinforces the format. However, it does not clarify the relationship between 'path' and 'value', nor does it explain whether 'value' is truly optional (since it's not required in the schema). This leaves ambiguity that the schema alone does not resolve.

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 uses specific verbs 'Write or replace' and clearly identifies the resource as 'data path'. The mention of 'Body is sent as JSON' clarifies the nature of the request. This distinguishes it from siblings like opa_get_data (read) and opa_patch_data (partial update).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like opa_patch_data or opa_put_policy. There is no context about prerequisites, such as requiring the path to exist or permissions needed. The agent must infer usage from the action alone.

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