pls_update_alarm_rule

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

The description discloses the need for a confirm string as a safety measure, which adds behavioral context beyond the destructiveHint annotation. There is no contradiction with annotations, and the update operation is clearly stated.

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 concise, with a clear header, parameter list, return format, and tip. It is front-loaded and wastes no words, though the structure could be slightly more formal.

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 provides the return format but lacks explanation of error conditions or what 'entity' and 'action' mean. For an update tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, additional context about usage context would improve completeness.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds a tip about only passing changed fields, but does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states '更新告警规则实体' (update alarm rule entity), clearly indicating the action (update) and the resource (alarm rule). It distinguishes from siblings like create and delete alarm rules, and the tip about only passing changed fields adds specificity.

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 provides a tip about only passing fields to change and requires a confirm parameter with the value '确认'. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state when not to use this tool.

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