Update Cluster Settings

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false and idempotent=true, but the description adds substantial context beyond them: the auto-pause semantics (inactivity threshold), the supported range, the org-admin token requirement, and a mandatory user-confirmation safety step. It could say more about what happens to an already-paused cluster, but coverage is strong.

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?

Bolded, front-loaded sections (Purpose, Returns, Behavior, Auth, Safety) make it scannable, and every line carries actionable content with no filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully explains the return value ('the updated cluster, including its effective idle timeout'), and it covers auth and safety. Complete enough for a 3-param mutation tool, though return details are brief.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies that 0 disables idling and that the effective supported range is 15-43200 minutes, which refines the raw 0-43200 min/max in the schema.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Update the idle timeout for a RawTree dedicated cluster.' It is tightly scoped to a single field, which differentiates it from siblings like pause-cluster/resume-cluster, though it doesn't name those alternatives explicitly.

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?

It explains how to use idleTimeoutMinutes (0 disables idling; 15-43200 supported), which implies intended usage, but it never states when to reach for this tool versus pause-cluster, resume-cluster, or create-cluster. Alternatives are left to inference.

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