Set Financial Access

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

No annotations provided, so the description shoulders the transparency burden. It discloses the role requirement, access levels, and a critical edge case (locking company out). This adds significant behavioral context beyond the schema.

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?

Four sentences with no waste. Front-loaded with main action, then role requirement, then level definitions, and finally an edge case. 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?

Given no output schema, the description could mention return values, but for a mutation tool the current content is sufficient. It covers parameters, role, and a critical constraint. Sibling list is extensive but this tool's purpose is well-isolated.

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 the description adds value by defining each enum value for 'level' ('none', 'read', 'write') with concrete capabilities, and explains the constraint on setting own access. This exceeds the baseline of 3.

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 action ('grant or restrict'), the resource ('team member's access to financial tools'), and distinguishes from siblings like 'get_financial_access'. The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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 explicitly requires 'owner role' and warns against setting own access to 'none' or 'read' if last owner. While it doesn't name alternative tools, the context makes it clear when to use this tool versus read-only siblings.

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