[Write] Update content rights declaration

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

The description is minimal for a mutation tool with no annotations. It discloses the 'Write' nature and dryRun support but omits details about permissions, side effects, reversibility, or response format. The dryRun mention is useful but insufficient to fully convey behavioral traits without annotation support.

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?

Utterly concise: two sentences, front-loaded with 'Write.' and no wasted words. Every element serves a purpose and adds clarity.

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 simple update tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and dryRun behavior, but does not mention return values, authentication prerequisites, or whether a prior read via asc_content_rights_get is recommended. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 67%, so the description partially compensates. It clarifies the meaning of contentRightsDeclaration ('third-party content requiring rights') and dryRun ('preview the change'), but does not add much beyond the schema's existing dryRun description and the enum values. AppId is left to 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Sets whether the app uses third-party content requiring rights.' The verb 'Sets' and resource 'content rights declaration' are specific and distinguish it from sibling read tools like asc_content_rights_get and other update tools.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention asc_content_rights_get or other related tools, nor does it specify conditions under which this update should be performed. The only context is implied by the resource name.

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