Create firewall policy (safe)

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits: it defaults to dry_run=true (safe mode) and requires a confirmation phrase for actual changes. Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, which align with the described safety mechanism. No contradictions found.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core action and safety detail. Every sentence earns its place. No redundant or verbose language.

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 tool's complexity (27 parameters), the high schema coverage (96%) and the concise description adequately cover key aspects: creation action, safety defaults, and confirmation requirement. No output schema exists, but the return value is not critical for tool selection. The description is complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 96%, so the schema itself provides strong parameter documentation. The description adds value by explaining the workflow for dry_run and confirm parameters, which are critical for safe operation. However, it does not elaborate on other parameters beyond what the schema already describes.

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's purpose: 'Safely create a firewall policy.' The verb 'create' and resource 'firewall policy' are unambiguous. The title reinforces this with 'Create firewall policy (safe).' It distinguishes from sibling update/delete tools by focusing on creation only.

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 states when to use dry run vs. apply: 'Defaults to dry_run=true. To apply, set FORTIGATE_ENABLE_WRITE=true and pass confirm exactly as the configured confirmation phrase.' It provides clear context for safe usage but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool.

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