adtk

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions actions but doesn't cover permissions, rate limits, side effects, or response formats. This is inadequate for a tool with multiple parameters and no output schema.

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 brief and front-loaded, stating the tool's purpose and actions in a single sentence with no wasted words. However, it could be more structured by separating actions or adding context.

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 complexity (6 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, usage scenarios, and output expectations, making it insufficient for effective tool invocation.

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 the schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds minimal value by listing the two action types, but doesn't provide additional context beyond what's in the schema, meeting the baseline for high 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 states the tool manages Azure DevOps Advanced Security alerts with specific actions, providing a verb ('manage') and resource ('Azure DevOps Advanced Security alerts'). However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like manage_repos or manage_projects beyond the domain, making the purpose somewhat vague in comparison.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lists actions but doesn't specify context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without clear usage instructions.

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