set_app_price_schedule

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the important behavioral trait that the operation overwrites existing schedules. However, it does not mention other traits like permissions, irreversible 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?

Two sentences: first states purpose clearly, second adds a critical warning. No redundant or unnecessary information. Front-loaded with key action and warning.

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 4 parameters all described in schema and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It provides the essential behavioral warning. However, it could mention return value or confirmation details for a destructive operation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters adequately. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond the warning, which is about tool behavior, not parameter semantics. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Set' and the resource 'price schedule for an app'. It differentiates from the sibling 'get_app_price_schedule' but does not explicitly contrast with other price-related 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?

The description provides a warning about overwriting the existing schedule, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No when-not-to-use or context for selecting this tool over sibling tools.

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