set_global_notice

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses the required permission (admin_write) and the mutating nature of the operation, but it does not mention whether calling it overwrites an existing notice, whether the operation is reversible, or what the response or side effects are.

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 front-loads the core action and includes the key permission requirement. It is concise, but the extreme brevity leaves out parameter and usage details that would make it more useful.

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 tool with 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is under-specified. It does not explain the format or constraints of 'message', the meaning or possible values of 'profile', whether the global notice replaces any previous notice, or what the tool returns. Sibling tools are present but not referenced for disambiguation.

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%, and the description provides no information about either parameter. The required 'message' parameter is only generically understandable from its name, and 'profile' is completely unexplained. With no parameter documentation in the schema or description, an agent cannot reliably fill in these fields.

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 a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('Survey Solutions Headquarters global notice'), and this operation is semantically distinct from sibling tools like get_global_notice and clear_global_notice. The resource is named precisely enough for an agent to understand what is affected.

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 permission requirement ('Requires admin_write permission') gives some context, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the related get_global_notice or clear_global_notice tools. Usage is implied by the verb 'Set', but no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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