save_custom_rules

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

Describes write to disk, validation, and return value. Does not mention behavior on validation failure, overwriting existing rules, or permissions. With no annotations, more detail about state change would improve transparency.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with action, no redundancy or extra words.

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?

Covers action, validation, disk write, return value (hash), timing of effect, and compatibility. Missing error handling details, but sufficiently complete for a save operation with well-documented schema.

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% and descriptions cover each field. Description adds minimal context ('Build in Enterprise Console or craft by hand'), but does not explain parameter meanings beyond 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?

Clearly states the tool saves custom governance rules to a specific file path, validates against schema, writes, returns hash, and specifies enterprise tier. Distinguishable from all sibling tools.

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?

Provides context (enterprise tier, local file, effect on next optimization) but does not explicitly state when to use or not use alternatives. No siblings with overlapping purpose, so no confusion.

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