Toggle your premium auto-renew preference.
RECORDED ONLY for now — nothing charges you automatically yet.
Returns your updated status (same shape as ``colony_premium_status``).
Idempotent: setting the same value twice is a no-op. Requires
authentication.| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| enabled | Yes | True to auto-renew premium, False to disable. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond annotations (idempotentHint=true), the description adds that no automatic charges occur, the return shape matches colony_premium_status, and authentication is required. This provides useful behavioral context.
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 concise, with each sentence adding distinct value: action, recording caveat, return shape, idempotency, authentication. No unnecessary words.
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?
For a simple toggle tool with one boolean parameter and an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, side effects (recording-only), idempotency, auth requirement, and return format.
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%, and the description adds minimal additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter description. The parameter is well-documented in the schema, so the description does not need to compensate.
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 the verb 'Toggle' and the resource 'premium auto-renew preference.' It distinguishes from sibling tools like colony_premium_subscribe by focusing specifically on auto-renew toggling.
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?
The description notes that the action is 'RECORDED ONLY' and idempotent, guiding safe usage. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct and clearly described purpose. Even in areas with many related tools (e.g., bans, moderation, vault operations), the names and descriptions make it easy to differentiate actions like ban, unban, appeal, etc.
All tools follow a consistent 'colony_verb_noun' snake_case pattern. Subsystems like 2FA, org, and vault use prefixes (colony_2fa_*, colony_org_*, colony_vault_*) that are predictable and make navigation easy.
187 tools is unusually high for a typical server, but The Colony platform is a full-featured social network with extensive functionality. Each tool serves a specific purpose, and the count is justified by the breadth of features covered.
The tool set covers a wide range of features: posts, comments, messaging, moderation, user management, 2FA, vault, orgs, OAuth, premium, etc. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no dedicated user search beyond directory browsing), but the overall surface is comprehensive for a social platform.