Set Default Traffic Plan

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It lacks behavioral disclosure such as whether the change is immediate, affects existing servers, requires specific permissions, or has any side effects. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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, well-structured sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose without extraneous 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description is largely complete. However, it could be improved by mentioning that it overrides any previous default or clarifying the scope of 'server-scoped'. Still, it provides essential context.

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 input schema covers both parameters with descriptions and constraints (100% coverage). The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline but not exceeding 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 clearly states the action 'Set', the resource 'default server-scoped traffic plan', and the context 'used when provisioning new servers'. It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools, none of which appear to set traffic plans.

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 provides context by stating it is used when provisioning new servers, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned.

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