manage_haproxy_backend_server

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) already indicate mutation, but the description adds no extra behavioral context such as the need for confirm=True on delete, immediate application default, or any side effects. This is a notable gap for a mutating operation.

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?

Single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Clearly communicates the core purpose in minimal words.

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?

Description is a minimal viable entry point. Given the tool handles two distinct operations (create/delete) with different required parameters and a safety gate, the description does not address these nuances, but the schema and output schema compensate partially.

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 description coverage is 100%, with each parameter already described in the schema (e.g., 'used for create', 'required for delete'). The description itself adds no parameter semantics, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('Add or remove') and the resource ('a server from an HAProxy backend'), making it distinct from sibling tools like search_haproxy_backend_servers or create_haproxy_backend.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use the tool (add or remove backend servers) but does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios. However, the action parameter adds clarity.

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