create_chrome_dlp_rule

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It importantly reveals that the tool is disabled from creating 'ACTIVE' rules with a 'BLOCK' action, which is a significant safety behavior. It also hints at trigger compatibility issues by recommending reference retrieval, though it does not enumerate all constraints.

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 four sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose, protection scope, safety restriction, and prerequisite. It is front-loaded with the core action and remains efficient without unnecessary fluff.

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 tool with 14 parameters, nested objects, and an output schema, the description gives enough context to select and invoke the tool correctly. It covers purpose, key safety limitations, and directs to a reference for technical details. The output schema makes return-value documentation unnecessary.

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?

The input schema already covers 100% of parameters with detailed descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by specifying the cross-parameter constraint that ACTIVE+BLOCK is forbidden and offering alternatives. This helps the agent avoid invalid combinations that the schema alone might not make obvious.

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 starts with a clear action and resource: 'Creates a new Chrome DLP rule for a specific Organizational Unit.' It distinguishes this from sibling tools like create_regex_detector or list_dlp_rules by explicitly focusing on DLP rule creation with browser-level protection.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: it warns against creating ACTIVE BLOCK rules and offers clear alternatives (INACTIVE BLOCK rules, ACTIVE WARN/AUDIT rules). It also directs the agent to retrieve '11-dlp-rule-reference' via get_document before using, which is a concrete prerequisite and usage pointer.

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