sigma_create_source_swap_policy

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false), but the description adds no further behavioral context. It does not disclose side effects, required permissions, body structure, or success/failure behavior, which is notable for a creation tool.

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 a single, concise sentence with no filler and is front-loaded with the action and object. However, its brevity comes at the cost of omitting critical details.

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 create tool with an open nested body and no parameter documentation, the description is incomplete. It fails to define what a source swap policy is, what the body should contain, and how it differs from manual source-swapping tools. The existing output schema does compensate for return values, but not for input requirements.

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 only parameter 'body' is an open object with no schema description (0% coverage). The description does not mention the body or explain what fields should be included, leaving the agent fully uninformed about how to construct the request.

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 uses the specific verb 'Create' with the resource 'source swap policy' and adds context 'for automated deployments.' This clearly distinguishes it from related siblings like sigma_list_source_swap_policies and sigma_get_source_swap_policy, which are read operations.

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 hint of when to use the tool via 'for automated deployments,' but it does not explicitly compare with alternative swap tools such as sigma_swap_workbook_sources or sigma_swap_data_model_sources. No exclusions or alternative guidance are given.

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