update-rum-retention-filter

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states 'Update' implying mutation, but lacks details on partial vs full replacement, required permissions, error handling for missing filterId, or impact on other settings. With no annotations, this is insufficient.

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?

A single sentence that is concise but omits important details like the full set of updatable fields and behavioral notes. Could be improved by front-loading the action and listing all fields.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and no behavioral context, the description is incomplete. It does not address partial update semantics, error conditions, or return value. An update tool typically needs to specify whether it's a partial or full replacement.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by naming some parameters (name, eventType, sampleRate, query) but omits 'enabled'. It does not explain the format or constraints beyond what the schema already provides, e.g., the enum values for eventType.

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 'Update a RUM retention filter' with a specific verb and resource. However, it lists only a subset of the updatable fields (name, event type, sample rate, or query) while the schema includes 'enabled', which creates a minor discrepancy. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like create-rum-retention-filter.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create-rum-retention-filter or delete-rum-retention-filter. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or preferred context.

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