admin_update_target_round_time

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It states the action ('Set round duration') and a permission constraint ('White team only') but does not explain side effects such as whether the change applies immediately, affects the current round, or requires any special conditions. For a mutating tool, this lack of behavioral detail is a notable gap.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences with no superfluous information. The front-loaded verb 'Set' immediately conveys the action, and the permission note 'White team only' is a useful, compact addition. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is mostly adequate. However, it omits behavioral context such as the effects of changing round duration and any potential constraints on allowed values beyond the schema type. This leaves it as a minimally viable entry, but it could be more complete with a note on when the change takes effect.

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?

The input schema already provides full documentation for the single parameter 'time' with the description 'Round duration in seconds' (100% coverage). The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond reinforcing the parameter's role, which aligns with the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Set round duration.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from other admin_update_* tools, though it does not explicitly name alternatives. The resource 'round duration' is unique enough to avoid confusion among the long list of siblings.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. 'White team only' is an access restriction, not usage context. There is no mention of prerequisites, when changing round duration is appropriate, or that alternative tools like admin_update_worker_refresh_time exist for different timing parameters.

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