igniteonly_policy

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 does not mention that the tool is read-only, idempotent, or any side effects, permissions, or rate limits. The description only states what the tool returns, lacking transparency expected for a policy retrieval tool.

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 extremely concise with two sentences. It front-loads the main purpose and immediately distinguishes from a sibling. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, fitting well within the space.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It explains what the tool returns but does not specify the format or structure of the guardrails. For a simple policy retrieval, this may be sufficient, but additional context (e.g., return type) would improve completeness.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty). The description adds no parameter semantics, but the baseline for 0 parameters is 4, as there are no parameters to explain. The description appropriately omits parameter details.

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 action ('Return') and the specific resource ('PinballWake IgniteOnlyAPI guardrails'). It distinguishes the tool from its sibling 'NudgeOnly' by detailing what the policy includes (verified worker wake packets only) and excludes, providing precise purpose differentiation.

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 context by naming the sibling 'NudgeOnly' and explaining the scope of the policy. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool over other related tools like 'igniteonly_api' or 'pushonly_policy', though the sibling reference offers some differentiation.

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