modify_resource_file

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

Mentions validation and backup support, adding context beyond the basic 'modify'. But 'validation' is vague, and backup behavior (e.g., automatic, restore) is not explained. With no annotations, the description partially carries the transparency burden.

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?

Single sentence, concise, but lacks additional useful structure. Could include more details without being verbose.

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?

Adequate for a modification tool with output schema (assumed). Describes action and key features, but could explain validation and backup more thoroughly given the tool's complexity.

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 100%, so parameters are described in schema. Description adds no extra meaning beyond schema, such as format or constraints, meeting baseline.

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?

Description clearly states it modifies a specific resource file with validation and backup, distinguishing it from read tool get_resource_file and similar modify_smali_file. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings.

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 like modify_smali_file or get_resource_file. No when-not or prerequisites mentioned.

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