update_carp_maintenance

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations and schema. It does not disclose that enabling maintenance mode sets all VIPs to backup or that apply_immediately may trigger an immediate failover. Annotations indicate non-destructive and idempotent, but the description itself is silent on side effects.

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 that front-loads the action and target. There is no filler or redundant information.

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 is simple, with well-documented schema and annotations, and an output schema exists. The description adequately states its purpose, but lacks usage guidance and behavioral disclosure, which lowers completeness slightly. Overall, the structured data compensates for the brevity.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not discuss parameters, but the input schema provides clear meanings for enable, maintenance_mode, and apply_immediately, so no additional description is needed.

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 action ('Update') and the target ('CARP maintenance mode settings'), distinguishing it from read-only siblings like get_carp_status. However, it does not elaborate on which specific settings are updated, though the schema covers that.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it give any context about maintenance operations or related tools.

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