Repoint Live Source

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

The description discloses that existing webhook subscriptions are re-created, which is meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations. The annotations already indicate a mutating, non-idempotent, open-world operation, but the description adds the specific side effect of webhook re-creation. There is no contradiction with 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?

The description is exceptionally concise: two short sentences. The main action is front-loaded, and the side effect is stated in the second sentence with zero redundancy. It earns its place entirely.

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 mutation tool with annotations and full schema coverage, the description is reasonably complete. It covers the core purpose and the key side effect. It does not mention return values or prerequisites, but these are partially covered by the absence of an output schema and the simplicity of the operation. Overall, it provides sufficient context for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 100%, and the parameter descriptions (e.g., 'ACI credential_id (UUID) to repoint to') are clear. The tool description does not add additional semantic meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Repoint a live source to a new credential.' It uses a specific verb ('repoint') and resource ('live source'), and the added detail about re-creating webhook subscriptions distinguishes it from siblings like add, remove, pause, or resume. This provides clear purpose and 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 implies the usage scenario (changing the credential of a live source) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor provide exclusions or mention sibling tools. The purpose is clear, but there is no direct guidance on when not to use it or what to do instead (e.g., recreating a live source).

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