Change an OtaKit rollout percentage

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

Adds valuable context: requires the reviewed current percentage (expectedPercent) and an idempotency key, and clarifies that cancellation is not handled here but via revert. Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the description's focus on preconditions and alternative action adds real behavioral guidance.

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?

Two sentences with no filler, front-loading the action and scope, then the preconditions and alternative. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a mutation tool with annotations covering safety and 100% schema coverage, the description adds critical usage details: required reviewed percentage, idempotency key, and the cancellation alternative. Lacks detail on failure modes or rate limits, but is otherwise complete for correct invocation.

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 the schema defines all parameters. The description reinforces that the reviewed current percentage must be supplied and an idempotency key is required, which clarifies how to use expectedPercent and idempotencyKey beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb (raise/lower/complete) and resource (active rollout percentage of a lane's current release). Directs the agent to prepare_revert/revert_release for cancellation, which distinguishes it from the sibling revert tools.

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?

Explicitly says when to use this tool (raising, lowering, completing a rollout) and when not to (to cancel a rollout, revert the release instead), naming the alternative approach. Lacks detail on prerequisites like rollout state, but context is clear.

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