create_ui_policy

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

Annotations indicate a write operation with no destructiveness. The description adds the prerequisite SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true, which is useful but does not elaborate on other behavioral traits such as validation, idempotency, or side effects. Given annotations cover safety, the bar is met minimally.

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 a single sentence with no superfluous words. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and a critical requirement.

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 tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description is sufficient to convey basic functionality and a key prerequisite. It could be enhanced by hinting at the return value or limitations, but overall it is adequate.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all 6 parameters adequately. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline without exceeding it.

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 creates a UI Policy to control field behavior dynamically, and includes a specific requirement (SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true). It does not, however, distinguish UI Policy from similar sibling tools like create_ui_action or create_client_script.

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 only usage guidance provided is the requirement SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true. There is no advice on when to use this tool over alternatives, nor what conditions or scenarios warrant its use.

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