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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), the description adds that nothing runs immediately, that permission is required, and that an already-enabled trigger is refused as a no-op. The refusal semantics are a meaningful nuance on top of the idempotency hint.

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?

Front-loads the effect ('switch back on' plus what that means), then constraints and the alternative. Every sentence carries distinct information with no redundancy.

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 single-parameter toggle with no output schema and safety already covered by annotations, the description supplies effects, permissions, no-op behavior, and sibling routing. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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?

Only one parameter (triggerId) and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents it, including its provenance ('from fastero_list_triggers'). The description adds nothing further about the parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Switch a trigger back on') and enumerates what a trigger covers (Python schedule, dashboard/page refresh, watcher), which lets an agent identify the resource class precisely. It also explicitly excludes dashboard emails, alerts and notebook runs, routing those to a named sibling.

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?

Gives explicit conditions: who may use it (owners, admins, editors of the org, regardless of creator), what happens if the trigger is already on (refused, nothing changes), and names the alternative (fastero_set_schedule_enabled) for non-trigger schedules. No inference required.

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