replace-policy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Replace an entire policy by ID (PUT)' discloses that the operation is a full replacement (entire) and uses PUT semantics (idempotent, full overwrite). It implies the existing policy is overwritten, but does not mention permissions, error behavior, or missing ID handling.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential action with no extra words. It is appropriately sized and immediately communicates the purpose.

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 annotations or output schema, the description is under-specified. It does not describe success/error responses, validation rules, or the required shape of the policy object, leaving important gaps for an agent to safely invoke the tool.

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 50% with only 'policy' described. The description adds 'by ID' which aligns with 'policy_id' but does not explain parameter formats or the structure of the policy object. It fails to compensate for the undocumented 'policy_id' parameter.

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 uses the specific verb 'Replace' with the resource 'policy' and the HTTP method (PUT), clearly indicating a full replacement operation by ID. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'update-policy' (likely a partial update) and 'create-policy'.

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 a clear context: use this tool to replace an entire policy by ID, implying full replacement semantics. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the intent is unambiguous.

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