Set Scaleway bucket lifecycle rules (full replace)

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint), it discloses that expiration permanently deletes objects, requires confirm=true regardless of rule content, and specifies storage-class applicability. This adds substantial operational context that is not present in the annotations alone.

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?

Every sentence is information-dense: purpose, replacement semantics, destructive warning, and storage notes. There is no fluff or redundant phrasing.

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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the key non-obvious behaviors (replace, delete, confirm, storage classes) and distinguishes from sibling lifecycle tools. It could mention edge cases or prerequisites, but it is sufficient for correct selection and invocation.

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 schema already covers 75% of parameter descriptions; the description adds meaning for 'rules' (full-replace) and 'confirm' (must be true), and clarifies storage_class enums. It supplements the schema rather than repeating it.

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 opens with a clear verb and resource ('Set a bucket's lifecycle rules') and immediately clarifies the full-replace semantics, distinguishing this from get/delete lifecycle siblings. The title's '(full replace)' is reinforced in the description, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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?

It provides clear context about the full-replace and destructive behavior, which tells the agent when to use it (complete overwrite) and that confirm=true is required. It lacks explicit alternatives, but the sibling tools (get/delete lifecycle) are obvious and the full-replace nature implies it is for setting a complete rule set.

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