domain_sieve_update

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Update', without indicating whether the script is fully replaced, whether activation is implied, whether validation occurs, or what permissions are needed.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the verb and object. It contains no filler or redundant phrasing.

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?

This is a mutation tool with six parameters and no output schema, but the description is only one clause. It does not mention the activate parameter, the distinction from generic sieve_script_update, or any outcome/return behavior, making it insufficient for confident invocation in complex scenarios.

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 already provides descriptions for all six parameters, giving 100% coverage. The description adds no parameter-level semantics beyond the schema, but the schema itself is sufficient, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb ('Update') and identifies the resource ('Sieve filtering script') scoped to 'an alias', which makes the core purpose clear. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like sieve_script_update or domain_sieve_activate, and it omits the 'domain' context from the name.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or explicit comparisons to sibling tools such as domain_sieve_create or sieve_script_update.

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