update_sla_policy

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the update is partial or full, required permissions, side effects, or idempotency. The agent has no insight beyond the tool name.

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 extremely brief (one phrase), which is under-sized for a mutation tool with a complex parameter. While front-loaded, it sacrifices necessary information for brevity.

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 the tool's complexity (mutation, one complex param, no output schema, no annotations), the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain what the update entails, what the response looks like, or any operational context.

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 single parameter 'sla_policy' is a complex object reference with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not clarify which fields can be updated or any constraints, leaving the agent to guess the expected structure.

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 'Sửa chính sách SLA' (Edit SLA policy) clearly states the verb (edit) and resource (SLA policy), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create, get, delete, and list. However, it is in Vietnamese, which may reduce clarity for non-Vietnamese agents.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_sla_policy, get_sla_policy). There is no mention of prerequisites or typical use cases.

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