block_ip

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

Discloses reversible nature, resolution preferences, and danger. Lacks details on exact changes made (e.g., rule creation) and required permissions, but sufficient given no annotations.

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?

Concise paragraph with no wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose, each sentence adds meaningful information.

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?

Covers main behavior and risks, but lacks explanation of return values, error handling, or prerequisites. For a tool with no output schema, this gap reduces 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 covers 100% of parameter descriptions. Description adds value by explaining site resolution (ARNS, instance ID) and default action. Enriches beyond 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 it blocks/unblocks an IP/CIDR and explains the resolution logic for the site parameter. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by emphasizing 'at the layer that actually works'.

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?

Provides context on when to use (dangerous, confirm with user) and describes behavior for site resolution. However, does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare with alternative tools like ip_ban_set or waf_rate_rule_set.

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