create_business_rule

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and discloses critical pitfalls: the API accepts expressions without left-hand operands but generates broken DS2 code, and boolean variables must be compared with =0/=1. This goes beyond the schema to explain behavior.

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 two paragraphs: a one-sentence purpose followed by focused warnings. Every sentence is informative and there is no redundancy or 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?

For a create operation with a detailed schema and an output schema, the description covers input nuances and usage context. It lacks only explicit return behavior, but that is addressed by the output 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% with good per-parameter descriptions; the description adds essential expression syntax guidance for conditions/actions, e.g., including the variable name and using =0/=1 for booleans, which is not present 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 opens with 'Create a new rule inside an existing SAS Business Rules rule set', using a specific verb and resource, and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like create_business_ruleset (creates the set) and update/delete/get business rule.

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 states that the rule set must exist and that multiple rules can be held, providing clear context for when to use. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, but the purpose is evident and the context is sufficient.

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