update_waf_profile

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the partial-update behavior and return status keys, but it omits important mutation context such as whether an ADOM lock or commit is required, whether changes are immediately applied, and what permissions are needed.

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 front-loaded with the core action and partial-update behavior, then lists parameters and return values cleanly. The Returns section is somewhat redundant because an output schema exists, but the overall structure is efficient.

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?

The description covers purpose, partial-update semantics, parameters, and return values. However, for a mutation tool with no annotations in a FortiManager context, it should ideally mention prerequisites, ADOM lock/commit implications, and whether changes are staged or applied immediately.

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%, so the description must compensate. It documents all five parameters, including adom, name, comment, external, and extended_log, and clarifies that external and extended_log are enable/disable toggles, though it does not specify exact allowed string values.

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 a WAF profile's top-level settings.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling operations like create_waf_profile, get_waf_profile, delete_waf_profile, and list_waf_profiles, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 statement 'Only specified fields will be updated' gives implied usage guidance for partial updates, but the description does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus create_waf_profile or get_waf_profile, nor does it state prerequisites such as the profile needing to already exist.

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