Set DataLens licence limit

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

Annotations already declare that this is a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive write with open-world effects. The description adds billing impact and a human-confirmation requirement, which is useful context beyond the annotations, though permissions requirements remain unstated.

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 first sentence is front-loaded and clear. The second sentence contains a useful warning but also includes the cryptic phrase 'Written from the DataLens document and never called: not measured,' which is not clearly actionable and weakens the structure.

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 a one-parameter write operation with full schema coverage, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers the essential behavior: it sets a billing-related limit, returns limits, and requires human confirmation. It is largely complete for this tool's complexity.

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% and the single parameter is already documented as the most licences the instance may hold. The description adds business meaning by explaining that this value is the number of seats DataLens bills for, which clarifies the parameter beyond the schema text.

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 states a specific verb and resource: setting how many licences the DataLens instance may hold and returning the limits. This clearly distinguishes it from datalens_licensing_limit_get and datalens_licensing_licenses_assign.

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?

It gives one important prerequisite: ask the person before calling because the value determines billed seats. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus reading the limit with datalens_licensing_limit_get or assigning licences with datalens_licensing_licenses_assign.

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