Enable or suspend Scaleway bucket versioning

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses crucial behavioral consequences: enabling creates delete markers instead of deleting data, suspension retains existing versions, and the versioning state can never return to 'never-enabled.' It also exposes a failure condition (InvalidBucketState with Object Lock). This is rich, non-obvious behavioral information that annotations alone do not provide.

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 compact yet information-dense. The first sentence states the core function, and the following sentences add necessary caveats about data retention, irreversibility, and Object Lock. No sentence is wasted or redundant.

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 state-changing operation with no output schema, this description is complete enough for reliable invocation. It explains the irreversible state transition, the confirm parameter, retention behavior, and a key failure case. An agent has enough context to decide when to call this tool and how to construct the call safely.

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 75%, and the description adds meaningful semantics for status by explaining what 'Enabled' and 'Suspended' mean operationally. It also reinforces the confirm=true requirement for suspension. Bucket and region are already documented in the schema, so the description appropriately focuses on the more nuanced parameters.

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 states the exact action: 'Set versioning to Enabled or Suspended.' It clearly identifies the resource (bucket versioning) and the two valid target states. It distinguishes itself from the sibling get_bucket_versioning tool and from other S3 configuration setters.

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 gives clear operational context: enabling keeps all object versions, suspending requires confirm=true, and suspension is not disabling. It also warns that suspending fails when Object Lock is enabled. However, it does not explicitly point to get_bucket_versioning as an alternative for checking current state, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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