cloud_sync

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses two distinct behaviors (toggle vs cleanup) and the condition requirement. However, it lacks detail on side effects (e.g., what happens if accept_conditions is false) or return value.

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 sentence that covers both use cases without redundancy. Every word adds value, and it is front-loaded with the main action.

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 has only 2 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the two operational modes. It lacks details like whether cleanup is destructive or if there are status responses, but overall sufficient for its simplicity.

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%, but the description adds valuable context: enabled toggles the service, accept_conditions is required once for enabling. This goes beyond the schema descriptions which only state basic purpose.

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 that the tool controls the cloud service, specifically toggling enable/disable (with conditions) or running cleanup. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_cloud_status or list_cloud_items by describing actionable behaviors.

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 explains when to pass enabled (to toggle) versus omit (to run cleanup) and notes the prerequisite accept_conditions=true for enabling. It does not explicitly exclude other scenarios but provides clear guidance for its primary uses.

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