Set the backup retention period

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool mutates a live environment, requires confirmation, defaults to a dry run, and runs a specific pac command with the active profile. This is strong disclosure for a mutating operation.

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 short but redundant: 'Changes a live environment: requires confirm: true' and 'Mutates a live environment: requires confirm: true' repeat the same fact. The command invocation detail is useful, but the duplication weakens the structure.

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 mutating tool with 9 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation behavior: live-environment mutation, confirm semantics, dry-run behavior, and the underlying command/profile. The schema covers parameter formats, and no critical operational detail needed for a correct call is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by spelling out the allowed day values and by explaining that confirm is required to actually apply changes rather than perform a dry run.

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 a specific action ('Set how many days backups of an environment are kept') and a resource with valid values. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling backup operations like creating, listing, or restoring backups.

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 gives clear usage context: changes to a live environment require confirm: true, and without it the tool performs a dry run. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the operational prerequisite is clear enough for an agent to know when to invoke it and how.

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