set_pii_config

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'set' without explaining whether this overwrites existing rules, whether it affects currently active profiles, or what side effects might occur.

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 only one short sentence with no redundancy, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It lacks necessary explanatory structure for a tool with nested rules and multiple strategies.

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 there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide substantially more context. It omits the meaning of the strategy values, the relationship between profileName and rules, and the behavior of the operation on existing configurations.

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 0%, and the description adds no meaning for either parameter. The rules structure and strategy enum are only visible in the schema; the description does not help the agent understand what profileName or rules mean in practice.

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 uses a specific verb ('设置' / set) and a clear resource ('PII 脱敏规则' / PII masking rules), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_pii_config. It does not elaborate on what the rules entail, but the core action is understandable.

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 call this tool versus alternatives, such as create_profile or use_profile, or whether the profile must already exist. The description gives no context about prerequisites or expected flow.

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