Changing an endpoint comment or name

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that it changes specific user-defined fields, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as whether changes are reversible, impact on existing data, or error states. It does not contradict annotations.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. The first sentence front-loads the core action and resource. Every word adds value.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are not required here. The description covers the operation, affected fields, and a permission requirement. However, it lacks prerequisites (e.g., endpoint existence) and error handling details. Adequate but not thorough.

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% with descriptions for all 5 parameters. The description mentions the fields changed (comment, name, custom attributes) which aligns with the body parameter, but does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 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 clearly states the verb 'Changing' and resource 'endpoint', specifies the exact fields affected ('comment', 'name', and custom attributes'), and distinguishes from sibling update tools by targeting endpoint-specific attributes.

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 mentions a required permission 'Perm: manage_endpoint_attributes', which is a usage condition, but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like action1_update_endpoint_agent_deployment or action1_move_endpoint. No exclusions or when-not scenarios are stated.

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