Modify plan properties

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and non-idempotent. The description adds 'may notify recipients or change tenant data' and the required confirm and operator opt-in, which goes beyond the annotations and clarifies side effects. No contradiction with annotations detected.

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 compact and front-loaded with the action, then the endpoint, body fields, reference, and critical caveats. Every part carries useful information and nothing is redundant with the schema.

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 path, body, query, and confirm parameters partnerships but no output schema, the description covers the endpoint, required fields, confirm semantics, side effects, and external reference. It does not describe the response body, but as there is no output schema this is not a significant gap.

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 around 75%, with path/query/confirm described. The description compensates by enumerating the valid body fields (id, propertyType, name, description, helpText, etc.), which is valuable because the body schema only requires id and propertyType and otherwise allows arbitrary properties.

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 ('Modify') and resource ('plan properties') and gives the exact API endpoint POST /api/xm/1/plans/{planId}/property-definitions. This clearly separates it from sibling tools like get_plan_properties and create_plan_properties.

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 states the prerequisites for use: operator write opt-in and confirm:true. It also warns that the operation may notify recipients or change tenant data, giving clear context for when it should be invoked. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the usage conditions are strong.

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