update_match_rule

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'replaces completely' indicating destructive write behavior, and mentions requiring the full JSON payload. However, it does not disclose permissions, reversibility, output, or side effects beyond the replacement.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action. No extraneous words or repetition. Every sentence serves a purpose: stating the operation and the required inputs.

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 complexity of a replacement operation, the lack of parameter descriptions in schema, and the existence of an output schema, the description under-delivers. It does not explain what a match rule is, what payload fields are expected, or what the tool returns. More context is needed for effective use.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It adds meaning to rule_id (the ID) and payload (full JSON), but does not explain the payload structure or required fields. The output schema exists but is not referenced. The description provides minimal additional semantics over parameter names.

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 tool replaces a match rule completely, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_match_rule (read) and list_match_rules (list), which are read-only, and other update tools for different resources.

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 implies usage when you need to fully replace a match rule, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention alternatives (e.g., partial update tool if exists). No exclusions or context for selecting this tool over siblings.

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