id_of_asset

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

The description states 'updates' and 'add or remove licenses,' which aligns with annotations (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false). It adds context about the type of update but does not disclose potential side effects like billing changes or irreversibility. Annotations already cover the destructive nature, so the description adds moderate value.

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 two sentences, but the first sentence ('Manage cloud resources or services') is vague and adds no value. The second sentence is specific. Could be more concise by removing the first sentence. Adequate length but slightly padded.

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 no output schema and medium complexity, the description should explain the return value (e.g., the updated asset object) and potential errors. It lacks information on prerequisites, success/error responses, or async behavior. The description is incomplete for a mutation tool.

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 description mentions 'add or remove licenses,' which relates to the 'quantity' parameter, but it does not explain the format or semantics of 'id' or 'quantity' (e.g., positive/negative values). With only 33% schema coverage, the description should compensate but adds minimal detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 updates an existing asset, specifically subscriptions like G Suite or Office 365, to add or remove licenses. However, the first sentence is vague ('Manage cloud resources or services'), and the tool name 'id_of_asset' is ambiguous for an update operation. The description distinguishes it from siblings like create_asset and list_assets, but not explicitly.

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 implies the tool is for modifying licenses of existing subscriptions, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it vs. alternatives (e.g., when creating a new asset vs. updating). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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