add_server_vacation

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

The description provides no behavioral information beyond the tool's name. With no annotations, the agent cannot infer side effects, permissions, or whether the tool modifies existing elements or creates new ones. This is a critical gap.

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 (one sentence), but it sacrifices necessary detail. Conciseness should not come at the expense of clarity; the tool's purpose and usage are underspecified.

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 has 8 parameters with no schema descriptions, no annotations, and many similar sibling tools, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to provide essential context about what a server vacation pattern is, how it behaves in the network, or what the output schema contains (though output schema exists, it is not described).

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 tool description does not explain any of the 8 parameters. Parameter names like 'threshold', 'distribution', and 'processing_time' are self-explanatory, but their specific roles in a server vacation pattern are unclear. The agent has no guidance on valid values or relationships between parameters.

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 states 'Add server_vacation pattern,' which provides a verb and resource, but the term 'server_vacation pattern' is domain-specific and not explained, leaving its purpose vague. Among many 'add_*' siblings, it fails to differentiate itself from similar tools like 'add_breakdown' or 'add_setup_machine'.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context signals indicating the appropriate scenarios for adding a server vacation pattern.

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