replaceSecurityTLDs

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the operation is destructive (removes all entries) and includes a safety note. However, it does not mention authorization, rate limits, or what happens after replacement (e.g., success response).

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 very concise: one sentence for the main action, plus two short lines for warning and safety. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with the key purpose.

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?

The tool has two parameters and no output schema. The description explains the action and destructive nature but does not describe the return value or response. It covers the core functionality but leaves out output behavior.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond the schema; it only refers to 'the provided list' generically.

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 replaces the entire security TLD blocklist, using the verb 'replaces' and specifying the resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like addSecurityTLD and removeSecurityTLD which operate on individual entries.

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?

Explicitly warns that the operation removes all existing entries, implying it should be used for full replacements. The safety note restricts usage to test profiles, providing clear context for when to use this tool vs. incremental update tools.

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