Set Rich Menu Default

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

The 'destructiveHint' annotation already indicates this operation is destructive. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as whether the previous default is replaced or the effect on users. It does not contradict the annotation, but also does not elaborate beyond what the annotation implies.

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 efficiently states the tool's purpose. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool with one parameter, though it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, destructive hint), the description provides the essential purpose. However, it omits context like the effect on the previous default and any return behavior, leaving the agent with incomplete information.

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 has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'richMenuId', which is already self-explanatory. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 the tool sets a rich menu as the default. The verb 'set' and resource 'default rich menu' are specific. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'cancel_rich_menu_default' or 'create_rich_menu', leaving room for ambiguity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'cancel_rich_menu_default'). It does not mention prerequisites, such as needing an existing rich menu to set, nor situations where it should not be used.

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